























hh a — Oy else wing 
rm = oo. rea = ball nf ar ee Tn. «os et em emia gee Be tek. cid o ein tee oie avin dine bone ee xe at ree SEP See ek eae we For rene 
— s, 0 ae oe et Ie | da caran lt lak etal atin! er Suede nee . eal : " pointe 
a v ay t » v lh il “ rn = at * er = = Se es 
oe ee SDDS ET ETI : ~ 
2 (Ch) y pear mapon en ogneane apanaonte nerbobeeriaeer eae Recpetremedes mpreengeenar rar tata am eek aS wescon. 





oni Se ands Ne Te nen Vise ah Ooty See SaaseS GERD ONRERNGD myumegearenay pees. ee eaten. He we ees tage ghd Wee iee bY) Ah Ange te See. 
RS See? a = eee oe ey oe 













Ny ee eg ey, 














tea pe Ae cnt een am Bene we 
mene oeayen a ecnmegomanawsnomne ware eants 
I 






































LUE die et = 
2g ae marr ArEM ET eee Re ee 1 ow ee eee mm eay game, 
Smoaynewe nownss oy we beled wena 






































tamnse Soe Er 
on ee poe eee oe 
: 5 a ww aes : 8 ee pe a! Rey Re ae 
- i ne - nn ase buy - * ~ T) ain + ee pee 
LO TO ENE E TE Saar a Nee a ae = ; ~ ~ A 7 as 
eee ee eee yr re : : 
* eh 


























: 
i 


rite ret 











qil 
# 








iti 
a} 
1, 











a ar 






















































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































2 omen on * 
_ = bd fe =~ . 
oy sem Sie: : 
ia er ‘ 
ew ues 
“oe =. - 
- mines | eh Are 
ere ca 
_ peoan Ips 
Sime. eres meg eye : Soe ne ie 
fama aa wn oamteuber gonacas renner newssevere Sytner coma rae 
a iegan Soha decennial addin ttre ees - YP eab late oe cTere 
aus mene re ape ee at Ca mw eiiremrenemale «MOS Ue prseennae weniree ee wrt wn Smarere atom ee met eee ee at 
ees See en a Se I ry ae 
EPpy foe Fmter se wm oeeeere mothe oyahee stent a 
A Seen on ee a : ogee - : 
40> Se mp oie > ene ee rerene mae rete on = 4 P = 
Seno pee Spleens epee ap nto feeb = rr rene Sete ih wine seauens step Lae ee rr 
Er ie Se res en ro ane agree nen anng wp eee Dep rer  eapae PNET EU Ae baleen ee as na 
ae oe eee Boeor germane ewe wee earn ee ee ae we Sonne penitent we eon , > 
en eae = ar : 7 : 
ie ems Wy Seon. we ey 6, = Sengee pirem 2 jmmmanruane remap parents ee ee . Ms 
pea on ctaign Sacks), Vapeankbosetnn.. swanre germane ied sea boes wate Secon : te oe - 
oon. wel bir sn ane levees. “ 2p One ee | een pera ae ark eo eawiapmn ae gh eee 
mn may ents | ee He ee eine te Pde 
ta meee Sie Se. wet trea ane 
- eal! were wa es , 
Rone Vipe ww: — ow ~ 
pooner, Ee Se See ore me 
mene ia weno? peer ened < 
mene) Sosa: wae ete ¢ 
=e rac we erie ve > 
= GEIS. ccieew ‘aeawee pee = 
ae Pe Bereaie) ‘eos ts x : 
yas onchal cro et ee ee te . ¥ 
R ar joo se sew peapshtes as , 
~ eee w- —k ee a - 
= canines + +. Re pee = - 
— % re eT 4 >= a ae 
ene : tem ow ie aa, 
aren ty ‘ Beet e aks 
pe Nes = peate.s 
ea = ~ : 
“a= aE = ¢ 
~ ose vrs ; 
Be aig Ma e- 
‘ res pea = 4 
g Prise ee on ere Some oem - bs J 
as < oh te, 
ral oer bal . teasers = 7 - 
: Sev ent SS Se aero mrarwenc meow reese eet e a ae os 
- 2 = baie 9 palctnnernhnpet ovine can wee © 5 
= — qe ee SS ~, 
= a = tetra Minto 2 : == 
M ee vee ws mf ~ ae 
? ened =eoess as ine oor * oom 
‘ as Byars ster pretty groan Soeeyctnktegeneint ipetent nantes serene = 7 
: eee mo hat peared : oe 
_ 3.2 . Py = 
Geet tees yo US 
x ar pom cca 3 = : 
pe a pr eee = mere cean be 
tose =e = = ¢ : 
Yn ee ae ene cake - wea Se 
a atersetc aot cra ces a Sa 
i teeta” teas Go 7 = / 
ia) seco ‘a ep, Oa > — : 
i! St - of we 6 si3cl8 
Serie ey ketel ane m= as 
SS ee Be > ~ 7 : 
= ll oe = :- > 
Aone ~~ oe es etal fae 
Sena ~ : ~ “= 
<r me: 4 = a mee 
of roneryy gh = = : 
Ssce fe 4 : = : 
= 4 2 oe = fs = 
= < Be = = 
2 = = 7 at ba 
7: Pan bg Meo deen ote 
2 : : > mie tie 
Siac he eae x my peoe? SS 
7 = - = Seavese 
S bwexp ie raes > Sanne 
4 tig an) = : 
a ee bs = Ps 
A Scenes eee = Sees oy, oe: 
St 7 2 Pe ais” win © 
Sere aioe Se oy pe : = ome a 
psa ee - = "is = é = mel ays 
“s. <3 = = = Bore S =: a ye 
fo eooR e : — me Sar 
= = = Ws eed: = meee id 
> : wt = = = z Be 
“—— = a - + 5 
~s i : = Bete VS. nl x 
> 3 ae : 
3 ne eos eee = - 
— ss bal = 1.72.35 wate % 
er ae oe —s abe os YO oe ~~ oe seanel™ spc 
ew Nae : = Tian ee car 8a Set : a 
= = : - eae ee os rs 
3 aaa doug migiceiret ears pie isinas earprenier moesecarey “ Hebi e, ampeme Sha an Se an 
Cee Ray een care wes = 3 Bo pre ren ipe teaser - 
<i ere: cowey etemets “Stee ace eeeyeend "~~ >S : — ol ac nae ee Ces! sig 
3 So Lt —— - : * a aa aaa : Ar oe es ein #4, 
aan me " . ‘ a : + 35 Rot gee’ we = - : 
y . * A : Bsc é — aa a ey a a ey me a oy RS — 
sent pear © eukbeies. ., 5 eral chs 2a ths Cees lenge ce tea = rane haere hepato r 
“ - haan My a orny Se ZT sma pcm Saeed ae ocmtette ~ OE ere ae — name 
peprees (Fe aa a ete nic adorn or P tta orien tees +753 a seweanicnce x “ie mar! eee ete oe on : 
a of epee ee epee = mee ne moon am San ee sens we barge ote aaa pun eats as comme - ea So perramacaany pes . : 7 oy Hk 
i ecaheae ties hieeneten ot iia at - = eterna renee ee ate . = > ; cpmmmquntannninns fap tn” Steed ha en Ne re 7 t : 
- : Me Sansa sencen y Pa ss fr sFrase Rar aye’ atm na z : "a RENE SIE + $n Gey Oy pare eee ec Pree 
SS ee eS a eee Sas fen inl ois 2 Oe ENT OW Re PRON 1 A ERIE i y ted apie te Sane pemoeernmewy yeas tae dei On en 
red = Fy: iow es - <1 . abe ee G Bare et wi = a a iethe ap nie tae ¥y ae a nd ee So Pcs oe 
Fer re ee ee ne oh we — es « eb £ < ” - a - a ota: nm - is - - ~* : is j 7 
Pa Pe an Gangs amgeemennemele a © ee eke epee eat orgenomn pees o Pel mafloe ae ee ey poe oe ee coe ee 3 erat andy wis s \ nice Wiest = te canoe i? . 
nypoe = eee ares SA TT agement rem meee meee a eee : neue 
F 5 7 








Ses - ane : : ss eae ‘ ; ee hel eae arkceetoeY 9 hrc aD ROE as * Sag seskaseone 
Hie een ceierin tee aS ARE ee yy eee gre ng oo eee = ; = Saver: aad sled taal le iain 


























Be 
ae 
one Gegeremweoscs 








; LIBRARY 


OF THE 


UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA. 
GIFT OF 


Mrs. SARAH P. WALSWORTH. 
i, Received October, 1894. 








~~ 




















SE2ZLG5. Class No. 3) Xo 
¢ - 














a ~ 
4 
* 








- Digitized by the Internet Archive ; 
in 2006 with funding from 


Microsoft Corporation 





COMMENTARY 


ON THE 
ORIGINAL TEXT 


OF THE 


ACTS OF THE APOSTLES. 





By H. B. HACKETT, 


PROFESSOR OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE IN NEWTON THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTION. 





BOSTON: 
JOHN P,. JEWETT AND COMPANY. 


CLEVELAND, OHIO: 
JEWETT, PROCTOR, AND WORTHINGTON. 


1852. 


P43 tA SS 


Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1851, by 
Horatio B. Hackett, 


in the Clerk’s Office of the District Court of the District of Massachusetts. 


99265 


CAMBRIDGE: 
METCALF AND COMPANY, 


PRINTERS TO THE UNIVERSITY. 


THE AUTHOR 


IS PERMITTED TO INSCRIBE THIS VOLUME 
; 


TO 


AUGUSTUS THOLUCK, D. D., 


WHOSE WRITINGS IN ILLUSTRATION OF THE SACRED VOLUME 
AND WHOSE PERSONAL INSTRUCTIONS HAVE CAUSED 
HIS INFLUENCE TO BE FELT AND HIS NAME 
TO BE HONORED IN FOREIGN COUNTRIES 


AS WELL AS HIS OWN. 





PREFACE. 





Ir has been the writer’s endeavor to present to the 
reader in this volume the results of the present state of 
biblical study, as applied to the illustration of the Acts of 
the Apostles. Although our language contains already 
some valuable works devoted to the same general object, it 
is hoped that the dependence of the work here offered to 
the public on the original text, and the advantage taken of 
the latest investigations in this department of criticism, 
will render it not superfluous. 

Of the importance of an acquaintance with the contents 
of the Acts, it must be unnecessary to speak. A single 
reflection will render this sufficiently obvious. No person 
ean be prepared to read the Epistles of the New Testa- 
ment with the greatest advantage until he has made him- 
self familiar with the external history of the Apostle Paul, 
and with his character and spirit, as Luke has portrayed 
them in his narrative. Those portions of. the Acts, consti- 
tuting the greater part of the whole, which relate to the 
great: Apostle, must be thoroughly mastered before any 
proper foundation is laid for the exegetical study of the 
Epistles. It is the object of these Notes to assist the 
reader in the acquisition of this knowledge and discipline ; 
to enable him to form his own independent view of the 
meaning of the sacred writer in this particular portion of 


vi PREFACE. 


the New Testament, and, at the same time, to furnish him- 
self to some extent with those principles and materials of 
criticism which are common to all parts of the Bible. If the 
plan of the work and the mode in which it is executed are 
such as to impart a just idea of the process of biblical in- 
terpretation, and to promote a habit of careful study and 
of self-reliance on the part of those who may use the book, 
it will be a result much more important than that all the 
opinions advanced in it should be approved ; it is a result 
beyond any other which the writer has been anxious to 
accomplish. ‘The grammatical references and explanations 
will enable the student to judge of the consistency of the 
interpretations given with the laws of the Greek language; 
the authorities cited will show the state of critical opinion 
on all passages that are supposed to be uncertain or ob- 
scure ; the geographical, archeological, and other informa- 
tion collected from many different sources, will unfold the 
relations of the book to the contemporary history of the 
age in which it was written, and serve to present to the 
mind a more vivid conception of the reality of the scenes 
and the events which the narrative describes. 

No single commentary can be expected to answer all 
the purposes for which a commentary is needed. The 
writer has aimed at a predominant object; and that has 
been, to determine by the rules of a just philology the 
meaning of the sacred writer, and not to develop the prac- 
tical applications, or, to any great extent, the doctrinal im- 
plications of this meaning. "With such a design, no one 
will object to the use which has been made of the labors 
of foreign scholars; it would have been a matter of just 
complaint not to have used them, although with a different 
aim it would be equally inexcusable not to have brought 
into view more frequently the connections which exist be- 
tween the Acts and the practical religious literature con- 
tained in our own language. 

It was the writer’s intention to add a supplement, dis- 
cussing several topics more fully than would be consist- 


PREFACE. Vil 


ent with the plan of the Notes. It will be observed that 
repeated reference is made to such a supplement, in the 
margin of the book. My state of health, which is such as 
to oblige me to relinquish for the present the duties of my 
office, must be my apology for failing to carry out this part 
of the design. The remarks in the Notes, however, are 
all adjusted to the conclusions which would have been 
supported in the additional pages, and the omission re- 
ferred to does not affect the essential completeness of the 
work. 

I am indebted to various friends for advice and codpera- 
tion in the performance of this labor. Among these it be- 
comes me to mention‘in particular the Rev. B. B. Edwards, 
D. D., Professor at Andover. It is doubtful whether I 
should have undertaken the work, or persevered in it, had 
it not been for his generous sympathy and encouragement. 
Mr. Bigelow, the corrector of the University Press at 
Cambridge, deserves my thanks for his valuable services. 
I have adopted many changes suggested by his skill and 
accurate judgment. 

The author can recall no happier hours than those which 
he has spent in giving instruction on this book of the New 
Testament to successive classes of theological students. 
May the fruits of this mutual study be useful to them in 
the active labors of the sacred work to which they are de- 
voted. ‘They are now sent forth into a wider sphere; — 
and, here also, may God be pleased to own them as a 
means of contributing to a more diligent study and a more 
perfect knowledge of his Holy Word. 


Newton Theological Institution, 
_ October 31, 1851. 








a Y*" “oP WE “=F ye 
“ T : = 


(v FIVERSITY) 





INTRODUCTION. 





§ 1. Tse Writer oF THE Acts. 


Tue evidence that the book of Acts was written by Luke, to 
whom the christian world are accustomed to ascribe it, is of a three- 
fold character. It will be sufficient for the object here in view 
merely to indicate the line of argument which establishes the cor- 
yectness of that opinion. A more complete and systematic view of 
the evidence must be sought in works which treat professedly of 
the formation and transmission of the Canon of the Scriptures. 

In the first place, we have the explicit testimony of the early 
christian writers, that Luke wrote the Acts of the Apostles.  Ire- 
neus, who became bishop of Lyons in A. D. 178, and who was 
born so early that he was intimate with those who had seen the 
apostles, says expressly that Luke was the author of the Acts; he 
‘quotes from him various single passages, and, in one place, gives a 
distinct summary of the last twelve chapters of the book (Ady. 
Heres. 3.14. 1). He treats this authorship of the work as a matter 
which he had no occasion to defend, because no one of his contem- 
poraries had called it in question. From the generation which sepa- 
rated Irenzeus from the age of Luke, we have only a few scanty re- 
mains ; but these, although they contain expressions * which, accord- 
ing to the admission of nearly all critics, presuppose an acquaint- 
ance with the Acts, are silent respecting the writer. To have 
mentioned him by name would have been at variance with the in- 
formal mode of citing the christian Scriptures, which distinguishes 





* See the passages, in Kirchhofer’s Sammlung zur Geschichte des N, 
T. Canons, p. 161 sq., in Lardner’s Credibility, and similar works. 
1 


2 INTRODUCTION. 


the writings of that early period. The next witness is Clemens of 
Alexandria, who flourished about A.D. 190. This father not only 
speaks of Luke as having composed the Acts, in his Stromata 
(Lib. 5), but is known to have written a commentary on it, which 
has not been preserved. ‘Tertullian, who lived about A. D. 200, 
offers the same testimony. He has, not only quoted the Acts re- 
peatedly, but named Luke as the author, in such a way as makes 
it evident that he merely followed in this the universal opinion of 
his age (De Jejun. c. 10; De Prescript. Heret. c. 22; De Bapt. 
c. 10, etc.). Eusebius wrote about A. D. 325. He has recorded 
both his own belief and that of his time, in the following important 
statement : —‘¢ Luke, a native of Antioch, by profession a physi- 
cian, was mostly Paul’s companion, though he associated not a lit- 
tle with the other apostles. He has left us examples of the art of 
healing souls, which he acquired from the apostles, in two divinely 
inspired books; first, in the Gospel which he testifies to have writ- 
ten according to what eyewitnesses and ministers of the word de- 
livered to him from the beginning, all which, also, he says that he 
investigated from the *first ;* and, secondly, in the Acts of the Apos- 
tles, which he composed, not from report, as in the other case, but 
according to his own personal observation.” (Hist. Eccl. 3. 4.) 

It would be superfluous to pursue this testimony further. It may 
be proper to add, that no trace of any opposition to it, or dissent 
from it, has come down to us from the first ages of the church. 
Some of the early heretical sects, it is true, as the Marcionites, 
Manicheans, Severians, rejected the religious authority of the Acts ; 
but as they did this because it contradicted their peculiar views, and 
as they admitted without question the source from which their op- 
ponents claimed to receive it, their. rejection of the book, under such 
circumstances, becomes a conclusive testimony to its genuineness. 

In the second place, the relation in which the Acts of the Apos- 
tles stands to the Gospel which is ascribed to Luke, proves that the 
author of the two productions must be the same individual. The 
writer introduces his work as a continuation or second part of a 
previous history, and dedicates it to a certain Theophilus, who can 
be no other than the person for whose special information the Gos- 





* Many, on account of the relative, take the sense of the Greek to be, 
all whom he accompanied ; but the manifest allusion to Luke 1, 2. 3 renders 
the other the more obvious translation. 


THE WRITER OF THE ACTS. 3 


pel was written. As to the identity of the writer of the Acts with 
the writer of the Gospel attributed to Luke, no well-founded ques- 
tion.has been, or can be, raised. Consequently, the entire mass of 
testimony which proves that Luke the Evangelist wrote the Gospel 
which bears his name, proves with equal force that he wrote also 
the Acts of the Apostles. ‘Thus the Acts may be traced up to 
Luke, through two independent series of witnesses. And it may be 
confidently asserted, that, unless the combined historical evidence 
from this twofold source be admitted as conclusive in support of 
Luke’s claim to the authorship of the Acts, there is then no ancient 
book in the world, the author of which can ever be ascertained 
by us. 

In the third place, the literary peculiarities which distinguish the 
Gospel of Luke mark also the composition of the Acts, and show 
that it must have come from the same hand. The argument here 
is founded on a different relation of the Gospel to the Acts from 
that to which we have just adverted. Luke being acknowledged as 
the author of the Gospel, we know from that source what the char- 
acteristics of his style are ; and it is maintained that these reappear 
in the Acts to such an extent, that we can account for the agree- 
ment only by referring the two productions to the same writer. 
The reality of the resemblance here asserted is conceded by critics 
of every name. It will be necessary to restrict the illustration of it 
to a few examples.* In Luke’s Gospel, verbs compounded with 
prepositions are more numerous than in the other Evangelists ; 
they are found in the same proportion in the Acts. Matthew has 
avy three times, Mark five times, John three times, or, according to 
another reading, but twice; while Luke employs it in his Gospel 
twenty-four times, and in the Acts fifty-one times. Luke has used 
das in his two books thirty-five times ; whereas it occurs in all the 
others but nine times. opevecOa is found in the Gospel forty-nine 
times, and in the Acts thirty-eight times, but is rarely found else- 
where. ‘The construction of ciweiy and Aadeiv with mpds, instead of 
the dative of the person addressed, is confined almost exclusively to 
Luke. No other writer, except John in a few instances, ever says 





* They are drawn out, more or less fully, in Gersdorf’s Beitraege, p. 
- 160 sq. ; Credner’s Einleitung in das neue Testament, p. 130 sq.; Ebrard’s 
Kritik der evangelischen Geschichte, p. 679, ed. 1850; and Dr. David- 
son’s Introduction to the New Testament, Vol. I. p. 190, and Vol. II. ps 8. 


4 INTRODUCTION. 


elmeiv mpés, While AaXeiv mpds occurs out of Luke only in 1 Cor. 14, 
6; Heb. 5,5; and 11,18. Asin Luke’s Gospel, so in the Acts 
we have a characteristic use of 5€ kai to express emphasis or grada- 
tion, a similar use of kat airés or avroi, the ifsertion of the neuter 
article before interrogative sentences, the omission of 6é after pev 
ovv, the uniform preference of ‘IepovoaAnp to ‘IepoodAvpa, and still 
others. Credner, in his Introduction to the New Testament, has 
enumerated not fewer than sixty-five distinct idioms which he 
considers as peculiar to Luke’s diction as compared with that of 
the other New Testament writers ; and nearly all these he points 
out as occurring at the same time both in the Gospel and the 
Acts. It is impossible, then, to doubt, unless we deny that any con- 
fidence can be placed in this species of criticism, that, if Luke 
wrote the Gospel which we accredit to him, he must have written 
also the Acts. 


§ 2. BIoGRAPHICAL SKETCH OF LUKE. 


According to Eusebius, as already quoted, and Jerome, who may 
be supposed to represent the opinion of their times, Luke was a 
native of Antioch. As he appears in the Acts to have spent so 
much time at Philippi, some modern writers have conjectured that 
he may have been a native or inhabitant of that city. The histori- 
cal testimony deserves more regard than an inference of that na- 
ture. That he was a Gentile by birth appears to be certain from 
Col. 4, 11. 14, where Paul distinguishes him from those whom he 
denominates of dyres ex meptroujs. His foreign extraction is con- 
firmed also by the character of his style, which approaches nearer 
to the standard of classical Greek than that of any other writer of 
the New Testament, with the exception of the apostle Paul. This 
feature of his language renders it probable that he was of Greek 
origin. Some have inferred this also from his Greek name ; but it 
was not uncommon for Jews, as well as Romans and other foreign- 
ers, to assume such names at this period. Whether he was a prose- 
lyte to Judaism before his conversion to Christianity, or not, is a 
question on which critics differ. The supposition that he adopted 
first the Jewish religion, and had done so perhaps in early life, ac- 
counts best for his intimate acquaintance with the opinions and cus- 
toms of the Jews, his knowledge of the Septuagint, and the degree 
of Hebraistic tendency which exhibits itself in his style. It appears 


BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH OF LUKE. 5 


from Col. 4, 14, that Luke was a physician; and the general voice 
of antiquity, in accordance with that passage, represents him as 
having belonged to the medical profession. ‘The effect of his fol- 
lowing such an employment can be traced, as many critics think, 
in various passages of Luke’s writings ; comp. the Note on 28, 8. 
The fact that he was trained to such a pursuit, that he was a man, 
therefore, of culture and observing habits of mind, is an important 
circumstance. It has been justly remarked, that, as many of the 
miracles which the first promulgators of the gospel wrought in con- 
firmation of its truth were cases of the healing of maladies, Luke, 
by virtue of his medical skill and experience, was rendered peculi- 
arly competent to judge of the reality of such miracles. 

Of the manner in which he was brought to a knowledge of the 
gospel, we have no information. The suggestion of some of the 
later fathers, that he was one of the seventy disciples, is not only 
without ground, but opposed to his own statement in the introduc- 
tion of his Gospel, where he distinguishes himself from those who 
had been personal attendants on the ministry of Christ. It is evi- 
dent that, after his conversion, he devoted himself to public chris- 
tian labors, for the most part in connection with the apostle Paul, 
whom he accompanied from place to place, and aided in his ef- 
forts for the extension of the gospel. The first explicit allusion 
which he makes to himself occurs in 16,10. He is there intro- 
duced to us as one of the companions of Paul, who was then at 
Troas. He goes with the apostle from that place to Philippi, and 
speaks of himself again in 20, 6; as one of the several individuals 
_ who sailed with Paul from the same city on his last journey to 
Jerusalem. Whether Luke had been separated from Paul during 
the interval, or remained with him, cannot be certainly known. It 
is eminently characteristic of the sacred writers, that they keep 
themselves out of view in their narratives. Hence some have ar- 
gued that we are not to infer that Luke was necessarily absent when 
he employs the third person, but rather that it was a sort of inad- 
vertence, as it were against his design, that he has now and then 
disclosed his personal connection with the history. The other opin- 
ion is the surer one. We cannot be certain that Luke was in the 
company of Paul, except at the times when his language shows that 
he was personally concerned in what he relates. It is clear, even 
according to this view, that Luke, in addition to his accompanying 
Paul on his first journey from Troas to Philippi, remained with him, 


6 INTRODUCTION. 


without any known interruption, from the period of his leaving 
Philippi the second time to the end of his career. He goes with 
the apostle to Jerusalem, where the latter was apprehended and 
given up to the custody of the Romans (20, 6 sq.; 21, 1 sq.) ; 
he speaks of himself as still with him at the close of his imprison- 
ment at Ceesarea (27,1); proceeds with him on his voyage to 
Rome (27, 1 sq.); and, as we see from the Epistles which Paul 
wrote while in that city, continued to be associated with him down 
to the latest period of his life of which any record remains. The 
apostle mentions Luke as residing with him at Rome in Col. 4, 
14; Phil. v. 24; andin2 Tim. 4,11. Of his subsequent history, 
nothing authentic has been preserved. ‘The traditions which relate 
to this period are uncertain and contradictory. According to 
Gregory Nazianzen, whom several later writers follow, he suffered 
martyrdom ; according to others, and those whose testimony has 
greater weight, he died a natural death. 


§ 3. AvTHENTIcITY oF THE AcTs. 


The foregoing sketch shows us how ample were Luke’s means 
of information in regard to the subjects of which his history treats. 
Of most of the events which he has recorded, he was an eyewit- 
ness. ‘The materials which compose the body of the work lay 
within the compass of his own personal knowledge. The particu- 
lars which he communicates respecting Paul’s life and labors before 
his own acquaintance with him, he could have learned, at a subse- 
quent period, in his intercourse with that apostle. His extensive 
journeyings could hardly fail to have brought him into connection 
with most of the other persons who appear as actors in the history. 
Some of his information he derived, no doubt, from written sources. 
The official documents which he has inserted (15, 23 sq. ; 23, 26 
sq.) were public, and could have been copied. We assume nothing 
at variance with the habits of antiquity in supposing that the more 
extended discourses and speeches, which Luke himself did not hear, 
may have been noted down by others at the time of their delivery, 
or soon afterwards, while the impression made by them was still 
vivid. If the writer of the Acts had any occasion for the use of 
such reports, his travels from one country to another must have 
given him access to the persons who could furnish them.* 





* As to the idea thrown out by Bleek, De Wette, and some others, that 


AUTHENTICITY OF THE ACTS. 7 


We-are to recollect, further, that the declaration which Luke 
makes at the commencement of his Gospel applies equally to the 
Acts. It was-his habit, as we learn there, to avail himself of*every 
possible source of inquiry, in order to ascertain the certainty of 
what he wrote. With such opportunities at his command, and with 
such a character for diligence in the use of them, the writer of the 
Acts, considered simply in the light of an ordinary historian, comes 
before us with every title to confidence which can be asserted in 
behalf of the best accredited human testimony. 

But this is not all. We have not only every reason to regard 
the history of Luke as authentic, because he wrote it with such 
facilities for knowing the truth, but because we find it sustaining its 
credit under the severest scrutiny to which it is possible that an 
ancient work should be subjected. 

First. ‘This history has been confronted with the Epistles of the 
New Testament; and it has been shown as the result, that the inci- 
dental correspondences between them and the Acts are numerous 
and of the most striking kind. They are such as preclude the sup- 
position of their being the result either of accident or design. It is 
impossible to account for them, unless we admit that the transac- 
tions which Luke records really took place in the manner that he 
has related. It is the object of Paley’s Hore Pauline to develop 
this argument; and the demonstration of the truth of the Acts, and 
of the New Testament in general, which he has furnished in that 

work, no objector has ever attempted to refute. 
_ Secondly. The speeches in the Acts which purport to have 
- been delivered by Peter, Paul, and James, have been compared 
with the known productions of these men; and it is found that they 
exhibit an agreement with them, in point of thought and expression, 
which the supposition of their common origin would lead us to ex- 
pect. The speeches attributed to Peter contain peculiar phrases 
and ideas, which impart a characteristic similarity. to them as com- 
pared with the other speeches, and which appear again in his Epis- 
tles, but in no other portion of the New Testament. In like man- 
ner, the speeches of Paul evince an affinity both to each other and 





Luke may have derived those parts of the Acts in which the narrator em- 
ploys the first person plural from a history of Paul’s missionary labors 
written by Timothy, see the Note on 20,6. The impossibility of that hy- 
pothesis, in a critical point of view, is exposed in Ebrard’s Kritik, p. 732 
sq., and in Davidson’s Introduction, Vol. II. p. 9 sq. 


8 INTRODUCTION. 


to his Epistles, in the recurrence of favorite words, modes of con- 
struction, and turns of thought, such as belong to no other writer. 
We have but one address from James, but even here we discover 
striking points of connection with the Epistle which bears his name. 
Occasion will be taken, in the course of the Commentary, to illus- 
trate this peculiar feature of the history. 

Thirdly. We have a decisive test of the trustworthiness of 
Luke in the consistency of his statements and allusions with the 
information which contemporary writers have given us respecting 
the age in which he lived and wrote. The history which we read in 
the Acts connects itself at numerous points with the social customs 
of different and distant nations ; with the fluctuating civil affairs of 
the Jews, Greeks, and Romans ; and with geographical or political 
divisions and arrangements, which were constantly undergoing 
some change or modification. ‘Through all these circumstances, 
which underlie Luke’s narrative from commencement to end, he pur- 
sues his way without a single instance of contradiction or collision. 
Examples of the most unstudied harmony with the complicated re- 
lations of the times present themselves at every step. No writer 
who was conscious of fabricating his story would have hazarded 
such a number of minute allusions, since they increase so immense- 
ly the risk of detection ; and still less, if he had ventured upon it, 
could he have introduced them so skilfully as to baffle every at- 
tempt to discover a single well-founded instance of ignorance or 
oversight. It adds to the force of the argument to remark, that in 
the pages of Luke every such allusion falls from him entirely with- 
out effort or parade. It never strikes the reader as far-fetched or 
contrived. Every incident, every observation, flows naturally out 
of the progress of the narrative. It is no exaggeration to say, that 
the well-informed reader, who will study carefully the book of the 
Acts, and compare the incidental notices to be found on almost every 
page with the geography and the political history of the times, and 
with the customs of the different countries in which the scene of 
the transactions is Jaid, will receive an impression of the writer’s 
fidelity and accuracy, equal to that of the most forcible treatises on 
the truth of Christianity. 

The objections which sceptical writers have urged against the 
authenticity of the Acts relate chiefly to the supernatural character 
of its narrations. It does not belong to the province of Biblical 
criticism to reply to such objections. They have adduced also a 


OBJECT AND PLAN OF THE BOOK. bs 


few instances of alleged offence against history, or chronology, or 
archeology ; but these result from an unnecessary interpretation. 
We may understand the passages which are said to contain the in- 
consistency in a different manner, and thus remove entirely the 
occasion for it. 


§ 4. Oxsect anp PLAN oF THE Boox. 


The common title of the Acts — apdges rév droordkov — is an- 
cient, but is supposed generally to have been prefixed, not by the 
author, but by some later hand. It is read differently in different 
manuscripts. It is too comprehensive to describe accurately the 
contents of the book. ‘The writer’s object, if we are to judge of it 
from what he has performed, must have been to furnish a summary 
history of the origin, gradual increase, and extension of the chris- 
tian church, through the instrumentality chiefly of the apostles 
Peter and Paul. In fact, we have not a complete history, but a 
compendium merely of the labors of these two apostles, who were 
most active in their efforts to advance the gospel, while the other 
apostles are only referred to or named incidentally in connection 
with some particular occurrence. It is not to be supposed that 
Luke has recorded all the facts which were known to him respect- 
ing the early spread of Christianity. On what principle he proceed- 
ed in making his selection from the mass of materials before him, 
we cannot decide with certainty. He may have been influenced in 
part by the personal relation which he sustained to the individuals 
-introduced, and the events described by him. It is still more prob- 
able, that the wants of the particular class of readers whom he had 
in view may have shaped, more or less consciously, the course of 
his narrative ; and these readers, in the absence of any surer indi- 
cation, we may consider as represented by Theophilus, who was, 
in all probability, a convert from heathenism. (See Note on 1, 1.) 

In writing for such readers, we should expect that Luke would 
lean towards those aspects of the history which illustrated the de- 
sign of God in reference to-the heathen; their right to participate 
in the blessings of the gospel without submitting to the forms of 
Judaism ; the conflict of opinion which preceded the full recogni- 
tion of this right, and the success more particularly of those apos- 
tolic labors which were performed in behalf of heathen countries. 
It cannot be denied that the contents of the Acts exhibit a predi- 

2 


10 INTRODUCTION. 


lection for this class of topics; that it is such as would spring 
naturally from the writer’s sympathy with Gentile readers, but is 
not so marked by any means as to authorize us, according to the 
view of some writers, to impute to him any thing like a formal pur- 
pose to trace the relation of Judaism to Christianity. 

In accordance with this trait of the Acts that has now been 
named, we have a very particular account of the manner in which 
Peter was freed from his Jewish scruples. The reception of the 
first heathen converts into the church is related at great length. 
The proceedings of the council at Jerusalem, with reference to the 
question whether circumcision should be permanent, occupy one 
of the leading chapters of the book. And the individual of the 
apostles who preached chiefly to the Gentiles, and introduced the 
gospel most extensively into heathen countries, is the one whom the 
writer has made the central object of his history, and whose course 
of labor he has described in the fullest manner. ) 

Luke has pursued no formal plan in the arrangement of the Acts. 
The subject of his history, however, divides itself naturally into 
two principal parts. The first part treats of the apostolic labors of 
Peter, and hence particularly of the spread of Christianity among 
the Jews, occupying the first twelve chapters; the second, of the 
labors of Paul, and hence the promulgation of the gospel in Syria, 
Asia Minor, Greece, and Rome, occupying the remaining chapters. 
But the book contains other topics which are related to these only 
ina general way. The following division marks out to view the 
different sections more distinctly. 1. Outpouring of the Spirit on 
the day of Pentecost, and the antecedent circumstances. 2. Events 
relating to the progress of the gospel in Judea and Samaria. 3. 
The transition of the gospel to the heathen, in the conversion of 
Cornelius and others. 4. The call of the apostle Paul, and his 
first missionary tour. 5. The apostolic council at Jerusalem. 6. 
The second missionary tour of Paul. 7. His third missionary tour, 
and his apprehension at Jerusalem. 8. His imprisonment at Cesa- 
rea, and voyage to Rome. 


§ 5. Time anp Prace or Writine THE Acts. 


The time when the Acts was written could not have been far 
distant from that of the termination of Paul’s imprisonment at 
Rome, mentioned at the close of the history. The manner in 


TIME AND PLACE OF WRITING THE ACTS. 11 


which Luke speaks of that imprisonment implies clearly, that, at 
the time when he wrote, the apostle’s condition had changed ; that 
he was no longer a prisoner, either because he had been liberated, 
or because he had been put to death. ) 

It does not affect the present question whether we suppose that 
he was imprisoned twice, or only once.* If we suppose that he 
was set at liberty, we have then a most natural explanation of the 
abrupt close of the book, in the fact that Luke published it just at 
the time of the apostle’s release ; or so soon after that event, that 
the interval furnished nothing new which he deemed it important to 
add to the history. On the other hand, if we suppose that Paul’s 
captivity terminated in his martyrdom, it is not easy to account for 
the writer’s silence respecting his death, except on the ground that 
it was so recent and so well known in the circle of his readers, 
that they did not need the information. Thus, in both cases, the 
time of writing the Acts would coincide very nearly with the end 
of the Roman captivity of which Luke has spoken. 

The question arises now, Do we know the time when that captivi- 
ty ended, whether it may have been by acquittal or death. Here 
we must depend upon the surest chronological data which exist, 
though it is not pretended that they are certain. According to a 
computation which has received the assent of most critics, Paul 
was brought as a prisoner to Rome in the year A. D. 61 or 62. 
In the year 64 followed the conflagration in that city, which was 
kindled by the agency of Nero, but which, for the sake of averting 
the odium of the act from himself, he charged on the Christians: 
- This led to the first christian persecution, so called, which is men- 
tioned by Tacitus (Annal. 15. 44), Suetonius (Ner. 16), and pos- 
sibly Juvenal (Serm. 1. 146 sq.). If now Paul was set at liber- 
ty after his confinement of two years, it must have been just beforé 
the commencement of Nero’s persecution, that is, in the year A. D: 
63, or near the beginning of 64. But if, according to the other 
supposition, the two years were not completed until the persecution 
commenced, he must, in all probability, as the leader of the chris- 
tian sect, have soon shared the common fate, and so have been put 
to death about the year 64. Hence we may consider this date, or 
the close of 63, as not improbably the time when Luke wrote, or 
at least published, the Acts of the Apostles. 





* Of the opinions on’ this point some account is given in Appendix 
No. 5. 





12 INTRODUCTION. 


But if Luke wrote the book thus near the expiration of the two 
years that Paul was a prisoner at Rome, it is most natural to con- 
clude that he wrote it in that city. This was also the opinion of 
many of the early christian fathers. ‘The probability of this con- 
clusion is greatly strengthened by the fact, that Luke makes no 
mention of Paul’s liberation, or martyrdom, as the case may have 
been. At Rome, every reader of the apostle’s history knew of 
course what the result of his captivity there was; and if Luke 
wrote it at that place, the absence of any allusion to his fate would 
not seem to be so very surprising. On the contrary, if Luke wrote 
it at a distance from the scene of the apostle’s captivity, the omis- 
sion would be much more extraordinary. 


§ 6. CHRroNnoLocy oF THE Acts. 


The subject of the chronology of the Acts is attended still with 
uncertainties, which no efforts of critical labor have been able whol- 
ly to remove. “ After all the combinations,” says Schott, ‘* which 
the ingenuity of scholars has enabled them to devise, and all the 
fulness of historical learning which they have applied to the sub- 
ject, it has been impossible to arrive at results which are satisfactory 
in all respects.”” The source of the difficulty is, that the notations 
of time are for the most part entirely omitted ; or, if they occur 
here and there, are contained in general and indefinite expressions. 
We must content ourselves, therefore, with endeavoring to fix the 
dates of a few leading events, which may be ascertained with most 
certainty ; and must then distribute the other contents of the book 
with reference to these, on the basis of such incidental intimations 
as may be found to exist, or of such probable calculations as we 
may be able to form. 


1. The Year of Paul’s Conversion. 


The date of this event is very uncertain; but an attempt has 
been made to approximate to it by means of the following combina- 
tion. In Gal. 1, 15-18, it is stated that Paul went up to Jerusalem 
from Damascus three years from the time of his conversion; and 
we learn from 2 Cor. 11, 32, that Damascus, when Paul made his 
escape from it on that occasion, was in the hands of Aretas, king 
of Arabia. As this city belonged to the Romans, it is remarkable 
that it should have been, just at that time, wrested from them ; and 


CHRONOLOGY OF THE ACTS. 13 


the circumstances under which such an event took place must have 
been peculiar. It is conjectured that a juncture like this may have 
led to that occurrence. Josephus relates that an army of Herod 
Antipas had been defeated about this time by Aretas, king of Ara- 
bia. Upon this, the Emperor Tiberius, who was a friend and ally 
of Herod, directed Vitellius, Roman Governor of Syria, to collect 
an adequate force, and to take Aretas prisoner, or slay him in the 
attempt. Before Vitellius could execute this order, news came that 
the emperor was dead, and as a consequence of this, the military 
preparations on foot were suspended. ‘This sudden respite afforded 
Aretas an opportunity to march upon Damascus, and reduce it to 
his possession. The city, however, supposing him to have become 
master of it, could not have remained long in his power. We find 
that the difficulties with Arabia were all adjusted in the first years 
of the reign of Caligula, the successor of Tiberius, i. e. within A. D. 
37-39; and the policy of the Romans would lead them, of course, 
to insist on the restoration of so important a place as Damascus. 
If now we place the escape of Paul in the last of these years (so as 
to afford time for the incidental delays), and deduct the three years 
during which he had been absent from Jerusalem, we obtain A. D. 
36 as the probable epoch of the apostle’s conversion. It is in 
favor of this conclusion, says Neander, that it gives us an interval 
neither too long nor too short for the events which took place in the 
church between the ascension of Christ and the conversion of Paul. 
Among others who fix upon the same year, or vary from it but one 
or two years, may be mentioned Eichhorn, Hug, Hemsen, Schott, 
_Guerike, Meyer, De Wette, Anger, Ebrard. This date determines 
that of Stephen’s martyrdom, which took place, apparently, not long 
before Paul’s conversion, and also that of Paul’s first journey to 
Jerusalem, and his subsequent departure to Tarsus. 


2. The Death of Herod Agrippa. 


This occurred at Czsarea in the year A.D, 44, The statements 
of Josephus are decisive on this point. He says that Agrippa, who, 
under Caligula, had reigned over only a part of Palestine, received 
the entire sovereignty of his grandfather, Herod the Great, on the 
accession of Claudius, viz. in the year A. D. 41 (Antt. 19. 5. 1); 
and further, that at the time of his death he had completed the 
third year after this extension of his power (Antt. 19. 8.2). This 
date fixes the position of several other important events; such as 


14 INTRODUCTION. 


the execution of James the elder, the arrest and deliverance of 
Peter, the return of Paul to Antioch from his second visit to Jeru- 
salem, and his departure on his first missionary excursion. 


3. . The Third Journey of Paul to Jerusalem. 


In Gal. 2, 1, the apostle speaks of going up to Jerusalem after 
fourteen years, which are to be computed, in all probability, from 
the time of his conversion. It has been made a question, whether 
this journey is to be understood as the second or third of the sev- 
eral journeys which Paul is mentioned in the Acts as having made 
to Jerusalem. ‘The general opinion is, that it should be understood 
of the third; first, because the object of that journey, as stated in 
15, 1 sq., coincides exactly with that which occasioned the one men- 
tioned in the Epistle to the Galatians; and, secondly, because. the 
circumstances which are described as having taken place in con- 
nection with the journey in 15, 1 sq., agree so entirely with those 
related in the Epistle.* Supposing, then, the identity of the two 
journeys to be established, we add the fourteen years already men- 
tioned to the date of Paul’s conversion, viz. 36, and we have A. D. 
50 as the year when he went up to Jerusalem the third time after 
he had become a Christian. Paul departed on his second mission- 
ary tour soon after his return to Antioch from this third visit to 
Jerusalem ; and hence we are enabled to assign that second tour to 


the year A. D. 51. 
4. The Procuratorship of Feliz. 


The time of this officer’s recall, on being superseded by Festus 
(see 24, 27), is assigned by most critics to the year A. D. 60 or 
61. The names of both these men are well known in secular his- 
tory ; but it so happens that we meet with only indirect statements 
relating to the point which concerns us here. It is generally agreed 
that these statements justify the following opinion. It is certain that 
Felix could not have been recalled later than the year 62. Jose- 
phus states (Antt. 20. 8. 9) that Felix, soon after his return to 
Rome, was accused before the emperor, by a deputation from the 





* The reasons for this conclusion are well stated by Hemsen, in his Der 
Apostel Paulus, etc., p. 52 sq., translated by the writer in the Christian Re- 
view, 1841, p.66sq. Dr. Davidson has discussed the question with the 
same result in his Introduction, Vol. II, pp. 112-122. 


CHRONOLOGY OF THE ACTS. 15 


Jews in Palestine, of maladministration while in office, and that he 
would have been condemned had it not been for the influence of 
his brother Pallas, who stood high at that time in the favor of Nero. 
This Pallas now, according to Tacitus (Ann. 14. 65), was poisoned 
by Nero in the year 62. The only circumstance which impairs 
the certainty of this conclusion is that Tacitus states (Ann. 13. 14) 
that Pallas had lost the favor of Nero some time before this, and had 
been entirely removed from public business. Hence some have 
placed the appointment of Festus as successor of Felix several years 
earlier than 61. But there is reason to believe that the disgrace of 
which Tacitus speaks may have been only temporary, and that Pal- 
las may afterwards have recovered his influence with the emperor. 
Since it is certain, according to Tacitus himself, that the death of 
this favorite did not occur till 62, it can be more easily supposed 
that Nero was again reconciled to him than that this revengeful 
tyrant should have suffered him to live several years after he had 
become odious to him. De Wette, Anger, Meyer, Wieseler, and 
others, admit this supposition, under the circumstances of the case, 
to be entirely natural. 2 

It is less easy to fix the limit on the other side. The general be- 
lief is that Festus could not have succeeded Felix earlier than 60 or 
61. Josephus relates (Antt. 20. 8.11) that Festus, after having 
entered on his office, permitted a deputation of the Jews to repair to 
Rome, in order to obtain the decision of Nero in a controversy be- 
tween himself and them ; and that Poppza, the wife of Nero, inter- 
ceded for them, and enabled them to gain their object. But this 
‘woman did not become the wife * of Nero until the year 62 (Tac. 
Ann. 14. 49; Suet. Ner. 35); and hence, as Festus must have 
been in Judea some time before this difficulty with the Jews arose, 





* Some, as Neander, Wieseler, object to the stricter sense of yuv7 in the 
passage of Josephus, but it is defended by Schrader, Meyer, and others, as 
the more obvious sense, whether we consider the historical facts or the 
usage of the word. Neander expresses himself with more hesitation about 
this date than any other, and with more than almost any distinguished 
writer. It is important, for the purpose of laying up in the mind a con- 
nected view of the history, to settle upon the precise years as nearly as 
possible ; but it will be perceived, from the nature of the data, that, of the 
numbers given in the above scheme of chronology, the second and last only 
can be brought to a state of comparative certainty, and that the others are 
to be considered merely in the light of an approximation to the truth. 


16 INTRODUCTION. 


and as, after that, some time must have elapsed before the case could 
be decided at Rome, Festus may have received his appointment in 
the year 60 or 61. The best recent authorities,as Winer, Anger, 
De Wette, Meyer, Wieseler, adopt one or the other of these years. 

We reach very nearly the same result from what Josephus says 
of his journey to Rome in behalf of the Jewish priests whom Felix 
had sent thither for trial before his removal from office. He informs 
us in his Life (§ 3), that he made this journey in the twenty-sixth 
year of his age, and as he was born in the first year of the reign 
of Caligula, i.e. A. D. 37 (Life, § 1), he visited Rome on this 
occasion about 63. His narrative, without being definite, implies 
that Felix, at this time, had not only been recalled, but must have 
left Palestine two or three years earlier than this. Festus was the 
immediate successor of Felix. 

It is the more important to settle as nearly as possible some 
epoch in this portion of the apostle’s history, since there would be 
otherwise so much uncertainty as to the mode of arranging the 
events in the long interval between this and Paul’s third journey to 
Jerusalem. Upon this date depends the year of the apostle’s arrest 
in that city on his fifth and last visit thither before he was sent to 
Rome. His captivity at Czsarea, which followed that arrest, con- 
tinued two years, and must have commenced in the spring of A. D. 
58 or 59. 


5. The Arrival of Paul in Rome. 


The extreme limit beyond which we cannot place this event may 
be regarded as certain. It could not have been later than the year 
62; for after 64, when the Christians at Rome began to be perse- 
cuted by the Roman government, their situation was such that the 
apostle could not have remained there and preached the gospel for 
two years without molestation, as stated by Luke at the end of the 
Acts. It is impossible to obtain a more definite result than this 
from secular history.* But the date in question follows as a deduc- 
tion from the one considered in the last paragraph. It is evident 
from the Acts, that Paul proceeded to Rome almost immediately 
after the entrance of Festus on his office ; and if this took place in 
60 or 61, he must have arrived in Rome early in the spring of A. D. 





* Whether this result is confirmed by 76 orparomedapyn in 28, 16, de- 
pends on the explanation of the article; see the Note on that passage. 


A 


' CONTENTS IN CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER. 17 


61 or 62. Hence, if he arrived even in 62, he could have remained 
two years in captivity, and then have regained his freedom (if we 
adopt that opinion), since Nero’s persecution of the Christians did 
not commence till the summer of 64. 


§ 7. Tue Contents IN CHRoNoLoGicaL ORDER. 

A. D. : 

33. Ascension of Christ. Appointment of Matthias as an apostle. 
Outpouring of the Spirit at Pentecost. Three thousand are 
converted. — Pilate, under whom the Saviour was crucified, is 
still procurator of Judea. Tiberius continues emperor till 37. 


33-35. Peter and John heal the lame man. They are arraigned 
before the Sanhedrim, and forbidden to preach. Death of 
Ananias and Sapphira. The apostles are scourged. Dea- 
cons appointed. Apprehension and martyrdom of Stephen. 


36. Persecution scatters the church at Jerusalem. Philip preaches 
the gospel in Samaria and along the coast of the Mediterra- 
nean. Christ appears to Saul on the way to Damascus. 
Conversion of Paul. 


37 - 39. Paul spends these three years at Damascus and in Arabia. 
— Caligula becomes emperor in 37. 


39. Paul escapes from Damascus, and goes to Jerusalem for the 
first time since his conversion. He remains there fifteen 
days, and then proceeds to Tarsus. 


40-43. During this period Paul preaches in Syria and Cilicia. At 
the close of it, Barnabas searches him out, and conducts him 
to Antioch in Syria. In the mean time, Peter visits Joppa, 
Lydda, and Cesarea. Cornelius is baptized. — Claudius be- 
comes emperor in the beginning of 41. On his accession he 
makes Herod Agrippa I. king over all Palestine. 


44, Paul labors “‘a whole year” with Barnabas at Antioch. A 

- famine predicted in Judea. James the Elder is beheaded at 

Jerusalem. Peter is cast into prison. — Herod Agrippa dies 

in the summer of this year. Judea is governed again by 
procurators. 


45. Paul goes to Jerusalem the second time, on the alms-errand, 
accompanied by Barnabas. He returns to Antioch, and, prob- 
3 


18 INTRODUCTION. 


ably in the same year, goes forth with Barnabas and Mark 
on his first mission to the heathen. 


46, 47. He was absent on this tour about two years. He proceeds 
by the way of Seleucia to Salamis and Paphos in Cyprus, 
thence to Perga, thence to Antioch in Pisidia, to Iconium, 
Lystra, Derbe, and then retraces his way to Antioch in Syria. 


48, 49. Here he abode, it is said, ‘a long time.”” We may assign 
these two years to that residence. 


50. Apostolic council at Jerusalem. Paul makes his third journey 
to that city, in company with Barnabas and others, as dele- 
gates from the church at Antioch. 


51-54. The apostle’s second missionary tour. Silas, Timothy, and 
Luke are associated with him. He founds the churches in 
Galatia. At Troas he embarks for Europe, and, among 
other places, visits Philippi, Thessalonica, Berea, Athens, 
Corinth. In this last city he remained at least a year and a 
half, and while there wrote the First and Second Epistles to 
the Thessalonians.* In the spring, probably, of 54, he leaves 
Corinth, touches at Ephesus, lands at Caesarea, and from 
there goes for the fourth time to Jerusalem, and thence to 
Antioch. We may allot three years, or three and a half, to 
this journey. — Felix became procurator of Judea in 52. In 

..53, Claudius bestowed on Herod Agrippa II. the former 
tetrarchy of Philip and Lysanias, with the title of king. In 
54, Nero succeeded Claudius as emperor. 


54~—57. In the autumn of 54, according to some, or early in 55, 
according to others, Paul entered on his third missionary tour. 
He goes through Galatia and Phrygia to Ephesus, where he 
spends the greater part of the next three years. During this 
period he wrote the Epistle to the Galatians, and the First 
Epistle to the Corinthians. Within the same time he made, 
probably, a short journey to Corinth, either directly across 
the AXgean, or through Macedonia. While on this excursion, 
some suppose that he wrote the First Epistle to Timothy, and 
after his return to Ephesus that to Titus. 





* The reasons for assigning the different Epistles to the times and places 
mentioned are stated in Appendix No, 6. 


CONTENTS IN CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER. 19 


58, 59. In the spring of 58, or perhaps 57 (if this tour began in 
54), he leaves Ephesus, proceeds to Macedonia, where he 
writes his Second Epistle to the Corinthians. In the autumn 
or early winter of this year, he arrives at Corinth, and remains 
there three months. At this time he wrote the Epistle to 
the Romans. In the ensuing spring, he returns through 
Macedonia to Troas, and thence to Syria and Jerusalem, 
which is his fifth and last visit to that city. ‘This journey oc- 
cupied about four -years. 


58 or 59. At Jerusalem Paul is seized by the Jews, but rescued by 
Lysias the chiliarch, and sent as a state-prisoner to Felix at 
Ceesarea. 


59-61. His captivity here continues two years. He pleads his 
cause before Felix, and also before Festus and Agrippa IL. 
He is compelled to appeal to Cesar. — Felix was superseded 
by Festus in 60 or 61. 


62 —64. In the autumn of 60 or 61, Paul embarked at Cesarea for 
Rome, and arrived there early in the following spring. He 
remains in custody two years. During this period he wrote 
the Epistles to the Ephesians, Colossians, to Philemon, and, if 
he suffered martyrdom at this time, the Second Epistle to 
Timothy, just before his death. .The Epistle to the Hebrews 
was written, probably, in this latter part of the apostle’s life. 
Most of those who maintain that Paul was imprisoned twice 
at Rome, suppose that he wrote the First Epistle to Timothy, 
and that to Titus, in the interval between his first and second 
captivity, and his Second Epistle to Timothy in the near 
prospect of his execution, after his second arrest. 














N. B. — The Greek Grammars to which most frequent reference has been 
made are the following: —— W., Winer’s Grammatik des neutestament- 
lichen Sprachidioms, fifth edition, or fourth in English (the sections are 
nearly the same in both) ; S., Professor Stuart’s Grammar of the New Tes- 
tament Dialect, second edition; K., Kthner’s Greek Grammar, translated 
by Edwards and Taylor; C., Crosby’s, second edition; B., Buttmann’s, 
Robinson’s Translation; Mt., Matthie’s, third edition of the original, or 
Blomfield’s Translation. Many other names, especially those of commenta- 
tors or critics, whom it is necessary to mention often, have been abbreviated. 


A list of such names will be found at the end of the volume. 








cate ep ey 
7 & ty 
c ; J uy * ~ ; 
SS 
~ : 7 RS 


NOTES 





CHAPTER I. 
V. 1-3. Relation of the Acts to the Gospel of Luke. 


V. 1. péy, solitarium, i. e. without any following dé ‘This 
omission, which occurs in the best writers, is very common in this 
book; see v. 18; 3, 18; 19,4; 26, 4, etc. K. § 322. R. 4; 
W. § 64. Il. 2.e. The writer commences as if he would have 
added, ‘but in this second treatise I propose to relate,” ete. 
Being led by the allusion to the ascension of Christ to state the cir- 
cumstances of that event, he relinquishes that form of the sentence, 
and introduces the subject of the book in a different manner. — 
mporov stands for the stricter mpérepov, like the interchange of first 
and former in English ; comp. John 1, 15. 30; 15, 18; and per- 
haps Luke 2, 2. — Gedfire. He appears from Luke 1,3 to have 
been a man of rank, since xpdrwore, when prefixed in the Acts 
to the name of a person, refers not to character, but to station ; 
see 23, 26; 24, 3; 26, 25. From the fact that Luke wrote 
his Gospel confessedly for Gentile readers, and that both there and 
here he has uniformly supplied such information respecting Jewish 
customs and places as they would need, we may conclude that 
Theophilus belonged to that class of readers, and that he was not, 
therefore, a Jew, or a resident in Palestine. The manner in which 
the book terminates * favors the supposition that he may have lived 
at Rome, or in Italy. Some have urged it as an argument for that 
opinion, that Luke has merely enumerated the names of places in 
Italy as if his readers were familiar with them ; but the proof is not 
conclusive. He takes for granted a sjmilar knowledge of the ge- 





* See the close of § 5 in the Introduction. 


24 NOTES. [cHAP. I. 1,2. 


ography of Asia Minor and Greece. He inserts no explanatory 
notices in this part of the history, unless we are to except 16, 12; 
27, 12. — dv Fpéaro, x... Sy stands by attraction for d. The verb 
carries back the mind to the beginning of the Saviour’s history, and 
is equivalent in sense to éé dpyjs. It marks the limit of the narra- 
tive in one direction, as dypx 4s #uégpas does in the other. Winer con- 
siders the expression as elliptical: which he began and proceeded to 
do; § 66. III. d. This is less simple, but yields the same mean- 
ing. Other explanations have been proposed. Olshausen thinks 
that Luke intended to suggest by #p£aro, that Christ only com- 
menced his work on earth; that he still continues and will complete 
itin heaven. Meyer finds in it an implied contrast between the 
labors of Christ and those of the apostles; he laid the foundation, 
—they were to build upon it and finish what he began. Both 
opinions seem to me far fetched. It is incorrect-to regard this verb 
here, or in any passage, as superfluous. See W. § 67. 4. 

V.2. fs Hpépas = THs tpépas 7, Matt. 24, 38; Luke 1, 20. — 
evrevAduevos, | understand, with Meyer and others, as referring to 
Christ’s command to preach the gospel to all the world, as recorded 
Matt. 28, 19; and which, from its memorable character, Luke 
could assume as well known to his readers. De Wette supposes it 
to be the command in v.4; but we have then an unnecessary 
repetition of the same thing, and, contrary to the natural order, the 
allusion first, and the fuller notice last. Some have proposed to 
extend the meaning of the word so as to embrace all the instruc- 
tions which Christ gave to the apostles in relation to their future 
work; but the term is too specific for so general an idea, and, be- 
sides, the obvious implication is that the giving of the command 
was something almost immediately antecedent to the ascension. — 
dud vevparos dylov, through the Holy Spirit, his influence, guidance. 
This noun, as so used, may omit the article or receive it, at the op- 
tion of the writer, since it has the force of a proper name. W. 
§ 18. 1. These words attach themselves naturally to the participle 
which they accompany, and it is forced, as well as unnecessary, to 
connect them with the verb in the next clause. This passage, in 
accordance with other passages, represents the Saviour as having 
been endued abundantly with the influences of the Spirit, and as 
having acted always in conformity with its dictates; see 10, 38; 
Luke 4, 1; John 3, 34, etc.’ That subjection was one of the laws 
of his dependent nature. — ods éged¢éaro, whom he had chosen. ‘The 


CHAP. I. 2—5.] NOTES.” 25 


aorist stands often for the pluperfect after a relative or relative ex- 
pression. W. § 41. 5.—dvednpén, sc. eis rov ovparvdv, Mark 16, 19; 
Luke 24,51. The abbreviation shows how accustomed the early 
disciples were to recur to this event. 

V.3. ois Kal mapéotncev. Kai joins mapéotncev to ods efede~aro. 
The persons whom Christ had selected as his apostles were the same 
to whom also he showed himself, etc. ‘Thus they not only received 
their office directly from Christ, but were able to testify from their 
own personal knowledge to the reality of his resurrection. — év zoA- 
ois rexunpios, by many proofs; or if, as De Wette suggests, the idea 
of the verb mingles with that of the noun, in many convincing mani- 
festations. texunpiov does not occur elsewhere in the New Testa- 
ment, and is a very expressive term. Plato uses it to denote the 
strongest possible logical proof, as opposed to that which is weaker, 
and Aristotle employs it to signify demonstrative evidence. The 
language seems to show that the first Christians had distinctly re- 
volved the question whether the Saviour’s resurrection was real or 
not, and had assured themselves of its reality by evidence which 
did not admit in their minds of the shadow of a doubt. ‘ Infallible 
signs ’’ does not express the sense too strongly. Compare the idea 
with 1 John 1, 1.— 8? jpepay, x. r. d., during forty days appearing 
to them, not being seen by them, i. e. from time to time, as related 
by the Evangelists. dzravouevos, as middle, agrees best with the 
active sense of the other verbs, and with the usage of the Septua- 
gint; see Tromm’s Concord. s. v. 


V.4,5. The Promise of the Saviour to send the Spirit. 


V. 4. ovvadifépuevos, sc. adrois, being assembled, as mentioned 
Luke 24, 49; not sc. adrovs, assembling them. The active sense of 
the verb has not been proved (Mey., Olsh., De Wet.).— rj émayye- 
Nilay = 7d éayyeAdOpevor, 1. e. the Holy Spirit promised by the Father. 
W. § 34. 2. It is said to be his promised Spirit, because it was 
foretold in the Old Testament that he would bestow it. See 2, 16; 
Joel 3, 1. 2.— iv jeodoaré pov, which ye have heard from me, viz. 
Luke 24, 49; see also John 15,26; 16,13. For the verb with the 
accusative and genitive, see K. § 273, R. 18; W. § 30. 7. d. 
The style of discourse changes suddenly from the indirect to the 
direct, as in 17,3; 23, 22, and often. W. § 64. IIL 2.; S. § 196. 2. 

V.5. od pera, x. r.d., not after these many days, after not many, 
afew, ‘This mode of inverting the signifitation of an adjective is 


4 


) 


26 NOTES. [cHaP. 1. 5-7. 


frequent in Luke’s style. Only ten days were now to pass before 
the promised effusion of the Spirit was to take place; see 2, 1. 
ravras, being the pronoun which points out what is near at hand 
(éxeivos what is more remote), represents the days as closely con- 
nected with the present. It is not superfluous, therefore, but 
strengthens the idea of the brevity of the interval. 


V.6-11. His Last Interview with the Disciples, and his 
Ascension. 


V. 6. of pév ody ovvedOovres, they now having come together, on 
a subsequent occasion to that inv. 4. This is the common view of 
the meaning. The mode of continuing the narrative is like that in 
8, 25; 15,3.30. De Wette construes the participle substantively ; 
they now who came together,i.e. at the time spoken of in v. 4. 
The construction would then be similar to that in 8,4; 11, 19. 
The Greek admits of either translation, but, as Olshausen remarks, 
the former agrees best with Luke 24, 49, according to which the 
direction to remain at Jerusalem was given before the interview 
which terminated in Christ’s ascension. — «i év 7@ xpdv@, kK. T. X. 
Their inquiry indicates an established faith in him as the Messiah, 
but betrays at the same time an expectation that his kingdom would 
be to some extent a temporal one; that it would free the nation 
from their dependence on the Romans, and restore to them their 
ancient prosperity and power. ‘This worldly view may have been 
the preponderant one in the question which they ask, though we are 
to suppose, of course, that, after having been so long associated 
with Christ, they had far more intelligent views respecting the 
spiritual nature of the Messiah’s mission than the great mass of 
the Jews entertained. ei introduces a direct question, which is con- 
trary to classical usage, though not uncommon in the New Testament 
and the Septuagint. K. § 344. 5.1.; W. § 61. 2.— droxahiordves, 
dost thou restore? ‘This present expresses an immediate future. 
W. § 41. 2; K.§ 255. R. 4. 

V. 7.  xpovovs i kaipods, times or occasions. See Tittm. de Synon. 
N. T. p. 89. It is one thing to know the general period of an event ; 
another, to know the precise time of its occurrence.— ods.... é&ov- 
cia, which the Father has set, or fixed, in his own power, i.e. in the 
sovereign exercise of it; comp. Matt. 21,23. The implied infer- 
ence is, that he may be expected to reserve the knowledge of such 
decisions to himself. The question of the disciples, as Bengel ob- 


CHAP. I. 7—11.] NOTES. 27 


serves, relates merely to the time when Christ would establish his 
kingdom ; and his answer, as here given, he confines to the same 
point. ‘Their remaining misconceptions as to the nature of that 
kingdom were soon to be removed more effectually than by any 
formal instruction. 

V. 8. dddd marks the opposition between what was denied to 
the disciples on the one hand, and what was to be granted to them 
on the other. — diva, efficiency, 1. e. every needful qualification to 
render them efficient in their apostolic sphere; see Luke 24, 49. 
The power of working miracles is included, but does not exhaust 
the idea. — émedOdvros .... ep’ iuas. This clause designates the time 
when they should receive this power, as well as the source of it. 
The construction is that of the genitive absolute. 'The dependence 
of mvedparos on dvvapw is less easy, but is preferred by some. — 
éaxarov, SC. wépovs. Compare the language here with Matt. 28, 19; 
Mark 16, 15. It is impossible that the disciples should not have un- 
derstood from it that their sphere of labor was to be coextensive 
with the world. See the remarks on 2, 39. 

V.9. énnpOn, was taken up, we may understand of the com- 
mencing ascent. It would thus differ from dvedndén, v. 2, which 
represents the act as completed. — imédaBev, by a pregnant con- 
struction, involves the idea of away as well as up, and hence takes 
after it dé. W.§ 66. III. e. This verb describes the close of the 
scene, as far as it was visible to the spectators. 

V. 10. as drevigovres, x. 7. d., as they were gazing towards heaven. 
This compound form of the imperfect renders the idea of the par- 
ticiple more prominent. K.{§ 238. R.'7. Kuinoel refers es rép 
ovpavdy to mopevouévov, Which separates the words from their natural 
connection, and leaves drevifovres without any direct object, as in 
3, 4. 12; 14, 9, and elsewhere. — al idov, then behold, = 73 ; 
comp. Matt. 9, 10; Luke 2,15; 24,4. This Hebraistic use of 
kai in the apodosis of a sentence, after an expression or idea of 
time, is frequent in the New Testament. See Briid. Gr. Concord. 
p- 456 ; W. § 57. 2. f. 

V.LL. of eat, who also, as in v. 3.— ti éorjxare, x... The pre- 
cise import of this address of the angels is not certain. As com- 
pared with such passages as Luke 24, 5. 25. 26, and others, it 
may suggest that the apostles should have been prepared in some 
measure for the event which had filled them with such astonish- 
ment. ‘They had been distinctly apprised by Christ (see John 6, 62 ; 


28 NOTES. [CHAP. I, 11, 12. 


20, 17) that he must ascend again to God from whom he came ; 
and the wonders which they had seen in their intercourse with him 
should have diminished their surprise at what had taken place. 
The inquiry, as so understood, leads naturally to the announce- 
ment which follows. It should abate the astonishment of the disci- 
ples at what had taken place, to know that it was not the only 
event of the kind which was to enter into the history of the Say- 
iour ; he whom they had seen ascend into heaven was destined to 
come again in like manner. According to Calvin, the disciples 
linger on the spot, distressed at the Saviour’s sudden departure 
from them, and still gazing upward, not without a hope that possi- 
bly he might reappear. ‘The address of the angels reproves them 
for this expectation, and at the same time consoles them with the 
assurance of his return at some future time. — éyv rpdmov, in what 
manner, as,i. e. visibly, and in the air (Bng., De Wet., Mey., Olsh.). 
The expression is never employed to affirm merely the certainty of 
one event as compared with another. The assertion, that the mean- 
ing is simply, that, as Christ had departed, so also he would return, 
is contradicted by every passage in which the phrase occurs ; see 
7,28; Matt. 23,37; Luke 13, 34; 2 Tim. 3, 8. 


V. 12-14. Return of the Disciples to Jerusalem. 


V.12. dad dpous, k.7.0., from a mount which is called Olive-yard. 
The usual name is épos rév édadv,e. g. Matt. 21,1. Josephus employs 
the designation which occurs here in Antt. '7. 9. 2.—€yov, not == 
dréxov, distant, as often represented, but having, i. e. amounting to. 
A Sabbath day’s journey was the distance — about three quarters of 
a mile — to which “ the traditions of the elders ” restricted the Jews 
in travelling on the Sabbath. In Luke 24, 50. 51, it is said that 
our Saviour led the disciples as far as to Bethany; and that there, 
while in the act of blessing them, he was parted from them and 
carried up into heaven. It was at Bethany, therefore, or in the 
vicinity of Bethany, that the ascension took place. That account 
is entirely consistent with this. Bethany was on the eastern de- 
clivity of the Mount of Olives; and, as appears from Mark 11, 1 
and Luke 19, 29, was reckoned as a part of it; so that the disciples 
in returning from that place to the city took their way naturally 
across the mountain. See Rob. Bibl. Res. Vol. II. p. 100. Luke 
specifies here the distance of Olivet from the city, instead of that of 
Bethany, because the former was better known to most of his read- 


CHAP. I. 12—14.] NOTES. 29 


ers, and conveyed a sufficiently definite idea of the scene of the 
ascension. 

V. 13. is rd Srepgov, into the upper room of some private 
house, not of the temple. The opinion that it was the latter some 
have supposed to be required by Luke 24, 53. But dcaravris, as 
used there, need not signify any thing more than a frequent resort ; 
they were in the temple always on the occasions when men in their 
state of mind would naturally repair thither; see 2, 46; Luke 2, 
37. Even De Wette allows that the passages involve no discrep- 
ancy. As the disciples must have been well known as the follow- 
ers of Christ, we cannot well suppose that the Jewish rulers would 
have allowed them to occupy an apartment in the temple. — of jvav 
katapévovres We are to understand, not of constant residence, but fre- 
quent resort for the purpose of prayer and worship (De Wet.). — 
"IdxwBos ’AXdaiov, sc. vids; but after “Iovdas we supply ddeAdos; see 
Jude, v. 1. The nature of the relationship in such a case is not 
determined by the construction, but is left to the knowledge of the 
reader. W. § 30.3; C. § 389.—6 {ydorjs = xavavirns, Matt. 10, 
4, from the Hebrew 3p. He is supposed to have received this_ 
epithet on account of his former zeal as a supporter of Judaism. 
As there was another Simon among the apostles, he appears to 
have retained the name after he became a disciple as a means of 
distinction, though it had now ceased to mark the trait of character 
from which it arose. It has been said, that he took the appellation 
from his having belonged to a political sect known as the zealots, 
who are mentioned by Josephus ; but the party distinguished by 
that name in Jewish history did not appear till a later period. 

V. 14. 6po6vpaddv, with one mind. The term characterizes the 
entire harmony of their views and feelings; comp. Rom. 15, 6. — 
rh mpooevys, in prayer, where rf points out that as the way in which 
they were occupied. kat 77 denoe, the best editors regard as an ad- 
dition to the text. It serves merely to strengthen the expression ; 
comp. Phil. 4, 6.— civ yuvaéi, with women. Among them may 
have been those who followed Christ from Galilee; Luke 23, 55; 
24,10. It is incorrect to suppose that they are meant exclusively. 
The absence of the article forbids that restriction. — kat Mapia, and 
(among them especially) Mary. «ai combines often a part with its 
whole for the sake of prominence. This is the last time that the 
mother of Jesus is named in the New Testament. — ddedgois adrod 
may mean his brethren strictly, or his kinsmen, relatives. The lat- 


30 NOTES. [CHAP. I. 14-17. 


ter sense would not exclude the other. They had not believed on 
Christ at first, John 7, 5, but had now joined the circle of his fol- 
lowers. 


V. 15-22. The Address of Peter on the Choice of a new Apostle. 


V.15. ey rais jpépas tavras is indefinite as a notation of time ; 

see Matt. 3, 1, where it marks an interval of thirty years ; also Exod. 
2,11. Here a short time only could have elapsed, as the ascension 
of Christ forms the limit on one side, and the day of Pentecost on 
the other. — re. It is worth remarking, that this particle rarely oc- 
curs out of the Acts and the writings of Paul. — dvoudrav = avopa- 
mov, as in Rey. 8,4; 11,18. The term may have acquired this 
sense from the practice of taking the census by registration or en- 
rolment. — él 76 aro, lit. unto the same place, implying an ante- 
cedent motion. It means, not that they were so many collectively, 
but that so many came together at this time; see 2,1; 3,1; 
1 Cor. 11, 20; 14, 23. — éxardy eixoow. We are to understand this 
as the number of the disciples at Jerusalem, not as the entire num- 
ber of those who had believed ; see 1 Cor. 15, 6. 
' V.16. a8pes is not superfluous, but rentlers the address more 
respectful. It is a compliment to be recognized as men. — éde, 
was necessary. ‘The tense is past, because the speaker has his 
mind on the part of the prediction already accomplished. — radrnv 
refers to the double citation in v. 20. The parenthetic character of 
yv. 18, 19 accounts for the distance of the antecedent, which in this 
case follows the pronoun. See K. § 332. 8.— fp» mpoeime, x. r. Xr. 
We have a similar testimony to the inspiration of the Scriptures 
from the same apostle in 2 Pet. 1, 21. — mepi "Iovda belongs both by 
position and construction to mpoeime, not to mAnpwoOjva. év or emi 
would have followed the latter verb. — 6dyyov. See Matt. 26, 47; 
John 18. 2 sq. 

V. 17. Here the second passage in v. 20 was before the speak- 
er’s mind. ‘That passage contemplates the case of an office trans- 
.ferred from one person to another; and since forfeiture implies 
previous possession, it is the object of ér.... év jyiv to remind us 
that Judas had fulfilled that condition of the passage: for he was 
numbered among us, i. e. the apostles. For that limitation of jpiv, 
see the next clause, and also v. 26. The full connection, there- 
fore, is: The prophecy speaks of an émcxom} which another shall 
take ; Judas held such an office, for he was numbered, etc., so that 


CHAP. I. 17, 18.] NOTES. 31 


the words apply to him.—rév kAjpov .... ravrns, the lot, or office, 
of this ministry which we possess, i. e. the apostleship, comp. Rom. 
11, 13. «Ajpor loses often its figurative sense, so as to denote a 
possession without any reference to the mode of its attainment. 
Our word clergy comes from this term, being founded on the idea 
of the order as one divinely appointed. 

V. 18. This verse and the next are considered by most critics 
as an explanatory remark of Luke (Calv., Kuin., Olsh., De Wet.), 
not as a part of Peter’s address. The reader might need this in- 
formation, but those who listened to the apostle may be supposed to 
have been familiar with the fate of Judas. It is evident that éore 
kAnOivat .. .. aiwaros, though appropriate to the history, could hardly 
have belonged to the discourse. -ydp in v. 20 appears to demand 
this view of the intervening verses. Bengel restricts the parenthe- 
sis to the explanation respecting Aceldama. — pér stands alone, as 
in v. 1. — éxrycaro, purchased, or caused to be purchased, gave oc- 
casion for it, i.e. it was in consequence of his act, and with the 
money gained by his treachery, that the field was purchased, as re- 
lated in Matt. 27,6sq. ‘The great body of critics adopt this view of 
the meaning (Bez., Bretsch., Kuin., Frtz., Thol.,* Olsh., Ebr., Mey., 
Rob.). This briefer mode of expression is common in every lan- 
guage, and may be employed without obscurity where the reader is 
presumed to be familiar with the facts in the case, or when the na- 
ture of the act itself suggests the proper modification. The follow- 
ing are analogous examples in the New Testament. Matt. 27, 60: 
*¢ And Joseph laid the body of Christ in his own new tomb, which 
he had hewn out in a rock,” i. e. caused to be hewn out for him; 
John 4,1: ‘¢ And when the Lord knew that the Pharisees heard that 
Jesus made more disciples than John,” i. e. through his disciples ; 
for he himself baptized not. See further,7, 21; 16,22; Matt. 2, 
16; 1Cor. 7,16; 1 Tim. 4, 16, etc. These cases are plain ; and 
no one refuses to admit the causative sense (not directly expressed, 
but implied) which belongs to the verb in such passages. The 
principle which this mode of speaking involves, the law recognizes 
even in regard to actions in its well-known maxim, Qui facit per 
alium facit per se. It is only by refusing to extend this usage to 
éxrnoaro that such writers as Strauss make out their allegation of a 
want of agreement between this passage and Matt.27,5. Fritzsche’s 





* In unpublished Notes on the Gospels. 


32 NOTES. [CHAP. I. 18, 19. 


suggestion as to the reason why Luke expressed himself in 
this unusual manner deserves notice. He finds in it a studied, 
significant brevity, a sort of acerba irrisio, bringing the motive 
and the result into pointed antithesis to each other: This man 
thought to enrich himself by his treachery, but all that he gained 
was that he got for himself a field where blood was paid for blood. 
— mpnmis is strictly the opposite of trios, i.e. on the face. His 
falling in that position may have occasioned the bursting asunder ; 
that view agrees well with yevoueros, though mpyyjs admits also of 
the vaguer sense headlong. — éddknoe is the first aorist from Adoxo. 
~W. § 15; K.§ 230. —In Matt. 27, 5, it is said that Judas, after hav- 
ing brought his money and thrown it down in the temple, went and 
hanged himself. Objectors have represented that account also as 
inconsistent with this, but without reason. Matthew does not say 
that Judas, after having hanged himself, did not fall to the ground 
and burst asunder; nor, on the contrary, does Luke say that Judas 
did not hang himself before he fell to the ground ; and it is obvi- 
ous that the matter should have been so stated, in order to warrant 
the charge of inconsistency. The circumstance which lay between 
the two occurrences has not been recorded. It has been thought 
not improbable that Judas may have hung himself on the edge of a 
precipice near the valley of Hinnom, and that, the rope breaking 
by which he was suspended, he fell to the earth and was dashed to 
pieces. In that valley was the field which had been purchased 
with his ‘ thirty pieces of silver.” It will be observed that Luke’s 
statement is entirely abrupt, and supposes some antecedent history. 
In this respect Matthew’s account, instead of involving any contra- 
diction, becomes in fact confirmatory of the other. It shows, 
first, that Luke was aware that something preceded which he has 
omitted to mention; and, secondly, it puts us in the way of com- 
bining events so as to account better for the incomplete representa- 
tion in the Acts, than would otherwise have been possible. 

V.19. Kal yoordv éeyévero, and tt became known, viz. that he 
came there to so miserable an end. —’AxeAdayad = ND “pn be- 
longs to the Aramezean or Syro-Chaldaic spoken at that time 4 Pal- 
-estine. On that language, see Bibl. Repos., Vol. I. p. 317 sq. It 
was for a twofold reason, therefore, says Lightfoot, that the field 
received this appellation ; first, because, as stated Matt. 27, 7, it had 
been bought with the price of blood ; and, secondly, because it was 
sprinkled with the man’s blood who took that price. Luke’s reason 


CHAP. I. 19-22.] NOTES. 33 


for the name, instead of being an additional one, would coincide 
with that of Matthew, could we restrict the subject of éyevero to 
éxrjoato .... adicias. It seems to me, however, that we are not at 
liberty to leave out of view the nearer clause which intervenes. 

V.20. The writer resumes here the address. ydp, namely, speci- 
fies the prophecy to which ravrny points in v. 16. See Matt. 1, 18. 
B. § 149; K. § 324.2. The first passage is Ps. 69, 25, slightly 
abridged from the Septuagint, with an exchange of atray for avrod. 
Its import is, Let his end be disastrous, his abode be desolate, and 
shunned as accursed. It is impossible to understand the entire 
Psalm as strictly Messianic, on account of y. 5: ‘“*O God, thou 
knowest my foolishness and my sins are not hid from thee.” It 
appears to belong rather to the class of Psalms which describe gen- 
eral relations, which contain prophecies or inspired declarations 
which are verified as often as individuals are placed in the particu- 
lar circumstances which lay within the view, not necessarily of the 
writer, but of the Holy Spirit, at whose dictation they were uttered. 
When Peter, therefore, declares that this prophecy which he applies 
to Judas was spoken with special reference to him (see v. 16), he 
makes the impressive announcement to those whom he addressed, 
that the conduct of Judas had identified him fully with such perse- 
cutors of the righteous as the Psalm contemplates, and hence it 
was necessary that he should suffer the doom deserved by those 
who sin in so aggravated a manner. — The other passage is Ps. 
109, 8, in the words of the Seventy. We are to apply here the 
same principle of interpretation as before. That Psalm sets forth, 
_in like manner, the wickedness and desert of those who persecute 
the people of God ; and hence, as Judas had exemplified so fully 
this idea, he too must be divested of his office, and its honors be 
transferred to another. 

V. 21. ravovvedOdrrer.. . . avdpav depends properly on éva, v. 22, 
where the connection so long interrupted is reasserted by rovrav. — 
ev mavtt xpdv@, in every time. ‘The conception divides the period 
into its successive parts. —év 6 ....éd’ quas = in which he lived 
with us; the entire life or course of life being described by one of 
its most frequent acts. It is a Hebrew mode of speaking ; comp. 
Deut. 28, 19; 31, 2, etc. An exact construction of the Greek 
would have placed ed’ jyas after the first verb, and inserted dd’ 
jpav after the second. W. § 66. III. h. . 

V.22. dpéduevos.... €ws, beginning and continuing unto, ete. 

5 


34 NOTES. [CHAP. I, 22-24. 


The supplementary idea was too obvious to need to be expressed. 
See W. § 66. II. d.—dzd rod Barricparos, not from the time of his 
own baptism, but from the close of John’s ministry. See Matt. 4, 12. 
17; Mark 1, 14 sq. At that time the Saviour had chosen his apostles 
and attached to himself a company of constant followers. — pdprupa 
....yevécOau. The resurrection is singled out as the main point 
to which the testimony of the apostles related, because, that being 
established, it involves every other truth in relation to the character 
and work of Christ. It proves him to be the Son of God, the Justi- 
fier and Redeemer of men, their Sovereign and Judge. See 4, 33 ; 
John 5,22; Rom. 1,4; 4,24; 10, 9; Gal. 1, 1, etc. Hence 
Paul mentions it as one of the proofs of his apostleship, and of his 
qualifications for it, that he had seen Christ after his resurrection. 
See 1 Cor. 9, 1. 


V. 23-26. The Appointment of Matthias as an Apostle. 


V. 23. Zarnoar dv0, they placed two, i.e. before them, in their 
midst; see 5,27; 6,65; or according to some, appointed two, i. e. 
as candidates. —Ioderos = Justus. It was not uncommon for the 
Jews at this period to assume foreign names. See on 13,9. Bar- 
sabas is mentioned only here. Some have conjectured, without 
reason, that he and Barnabas (4, 36) were the same person. 

V. 24. smpocevédpevor cirov, they prayed, saying. ‘The participle 
contains the principal idea. It may be supposed to have been Peter 
who uttered the prayer. — od, kipie, x. r. XA. Whether this prayer 
was addressed to Christ or God has been disputed. ‘The reasons 
for the former opinion are that xépuos, when taken absolutely in the 
New Testament, refers uniformly to Christ ; that Christ selected the 
other apostles as stated in v. 2; that the first Christians were in the 
habit of praying to him (see on 7, 59; 9, 14); and that Peter 
says to Christ in John 21, 17, ‘ Lord, thou knowest all things,” 
which is the import exactly of xapdioyyéora. The reasons for the 
other opinion do not invalidate these. 'That xapdvoyydorns is used 
of God in 15,8 shows only that it does not apply exclusively to 
Christ. The call of Peter in 15,'7, which is ascribed to God, was 
a call, not to the apostleship, but to preach the gospel to the hea- 
then; and even if that case were parallel to this, it would be an in- 
stance only of the common usage of referring the same or a similar 
act indiscriminately to Christ or God. This latter remark applies 
also to such passages as 2 Cor. 1,1; Eph. 1,1;2 Tim. 1,1. To 


CHAP. I. 24—26.] NOTES. 35 


deny that Peter would ascribe omniscience to Christ because in 
Jer. 17, 10 it is said to be the prerogative of God to know the heart, 
contradicts John 21, 17. Some have supposed the apostle intended 
to quote that passage of the prophet, but the similarity is too slight 
to prove such a design; nor, if the idea of kapdwoyyaora Were drawn 
from that source, would the application of it here conform necessarily 
to its application there. — éva we are to connect with dv, which one. 

V. 25. «djjpov, as in v. 17. — diaxoviag.... droorodjs, this minis- 
try and (that) an apostleship. «ai adds a second term explanatory 
of the first, i. e. essentially an instance of hendiadys (Mey., 
De Wet.), the ministry of this apostleship. —é& js mapéBn, from 
which he went aside, as opposed to the idea of adhering faithfully 
to the character and service which his apostleship required of him; 
“‘ad normam Hebr. 30 sq. {2 = deserere munus.” Wahl. — 
mopevOnvat.... Wor, that he might go unto his own place. The clause 
is telic, depending on mapéByn. So long as Judas retained his office, 
he was kept back, as it were, from his proper destiny. He must 
relinquish it, therefore, in order to suffer his just deserts. In this 
way the apostle would state strongly the idea, that the traitor merited 
the doom to which he had been consigned. The following com- 
ment of Meyer presents the only view of the further meaning of 
the passage which has any respectable critical support :—‘* What 
is meant here by 6 rémos 6 idwos is not to be decided by the usage 
of rézos in itself considered (for réros may denote any place), but 
merely by the context. That requires that we understand by it 
Gehenna, which is conceived of as the place to which Judas in vir- 
tue of his character properly belongs. Since the treachery of 
Judas was in itself so fearful a crime, and was still further aggra- 
vated by self-murder (which alone, according to Jewish ideas, de- 
served punishment in hell), the hearers of Peter could have had no 
doubt as to the sense to be attached to rémos iéios. This explanation 
is demanded also by the analogy of Rabbinic passages, e. g. Baal 
Turim on Numb. 24, 25 (see Lightfoot; Hor. Hebr. ad loc.): 
Balaam ivit in locum suum,i. e. inGehennam.” De Wette assents 
entirely to this interpretation. rémos iis, therefore, “is a euphe- 
mistic designation of the place of punishment, in which the sin of 
Judas rendered it just that he should have his abode.” (Olsh.) 

V. 26. kai édaxav kdijpous, and they gave, put (probably — {N3) the 
lots of them into an urn, or something which answered that purpose. 
The Jews practised the lot in various ways, but that indicated above 





36 NOTES. [cHAP. 1, 26-11. 1. 


was a common one, and the language points to that as readily as to 
any other. éecev decides nothing, as it defines the result only, not 
the process. airéy refers not to the subject of the verb, but to the 
candidates, and the lots are said to be theirs, because their names 
were written on them, or, as De Wette prefers, because the lots were 
to decide between them. Some of the best manuscripts read adrois, 
for them, instead of avrév. Lachmann adopts that form. — 6 kdjjpos, 
the lot which decided the choice. — ovyxarewnpicOn .... dmocrddor, 
was numbered together with the eleven apostles, i. e. was recognized 
as one of their order, and had the character of an apostle hence- 
forth accorded to him. Hesychius sanctions this sense of the 
verb, though it means properly to vote against, condemn, which is 
out of the question here. De Wette renders was chosen, elected, 
which not only deviates from classic usage, but ascribes the result to 
their own act, instead of a Divine interposition. The subsequent 
election of Paul to the apostleship did not discredit or abrogate this 
decision, but simply enlarged the original number of the apostles. 





CHAPTER II. 


V.1-4. Descent of the Holy Spirit. 


V. 1. év rd ovpmdrnpodoba, x. 7. r., when the day of Pentecost was 
fully come, arrived. See Luke 9,51. The action of the verb (lit. 
to be completed) refers not to the day itself, but to the completion of 
the interval which was to pass before its arrival (Olsh.). Some 
translate while it was completed, i. e.in the course of it, on that 
day (Mey., De Wet.). For the construction of the infinitive, see 
W. § 45. 6; S. § 165. 4. —-rijs mevrnxoorns the Greek Jews em- 
ployed as a proper name. See 20, 16; 1 Cor. 16,8; 2 Macc. 12, 
32. yepa or éopry determined the form. This festival received 
its name from its occurring on the fiftieth day from the second day 
of the Passover; so that the interval embraced a cycle of seven 
entire weeks, i. e. a week of weeks. It is usually called in the Old 
Testament, with reference to this circumstance, the festival of 
weeks. Its observance took place at the close of the gathering of 
the harvest, and was no doubt mainly commemorative of that event. 
See Jahn’s Archeol. § 355. According to the later Jews, Pente- 


CHAP. Il. 1-3. ] NOTES. 37 


cost was observed also as the day on which the law was given from 
Sinai; but no trace of this custom is found in the Old ‘Testament, 
or in the works of Philo or Josephus. — épobvpaddy = dpoixas. Its 
other sense, together, would be superfluous, followed by émi rd aire. 
See on 1, 15. 

V.2. domep.... Biaias, as if a mighty wind, lit. blast, were 
rushing along. smvoy =avedpa. The more uncommon word is 
chosen here perhaps on account of the different sense of avetyua 
in this connection, e. g. v. 4. As used of the wind, ¢épecOa de- 
notes often rapid, violent motion; see the proofs in Kypke’s Obss. 
Sacr. Vol. Il. p. 11, and in Kuinoel ad loc. — émAnpacer, sc. #yos, 
which is the only natural subject furnished by the context. — ofkoy 
is probably the place referred to in 1, 13; not the temple, for the 
reasons there stated, and because the term employed in this abso- 
lute way does not signify the temple or an apartment of it. 

V. 3. Kai SpOnoav, x. r. ., And there appeared to them tongues 
distributed, i.e. among them, and sat, sc. yAdooa, upon each one of 
them. So Bengel, Olshausen, Wahl, De Wette, Robinson, and most 
of the later critics. The distributive idea occasions the change of 
number in éxdéice. W.§ 41.1. avrois belongs strictly to the verb, but 
extends its force to the participle. According to this view, the fire- 
like appearance presented itself at first, as it were, in a single body, 
and then suddenly parted in this direction and that, so that a portion 
of it rested on each of those present. It could be called a tongue 
in that case from its shape, as extended, pointed, and may have as- 
sumed such an appearance as a symbol of the miraculous gift 
‘which accompanied the wonder. This secures to dvapepifdpevar its 
proper meaning; see v. 45; Matt. 27, 35; Luke 23, 34, etc. ; and 
explains why the first verb is singular, while the second is plural. 
Calvin, Heinrichs, and many of the older commentators, render the 
participle disparted, cleft, and suppose it to describe the flame as 
exhibiting in each instance a tongue-like, forked appearance. The 
objection to this view is, that it rests upon a doubtful sense of the 
word, and especially that it offers no explanation of the change 
from the plural verb to the singular. De Wette, after others, has 
adduced passages here from the Rabbinic writers to show that it 
was a common belief of the Jews that an appearance like fire often 
encircled the heads of distinguished teachers of the law. To this 
it has been added, that instances of a similar phenomenon are related 
by the Greek and Roman writers. We are directed by such coin- 


38 NOTES. [CHAP. II. 3, 4. 


cidences to an important fact in the history of the divine revela- 
tions, and that is, that God has often been pleased to reveal himself 
to men in conformity with their own conceptions as to the mode in 
which it is natural to expect communications from him. The ap- 
pearance of the star to the Magians may be regarded as another 
instance of such accommodation to human views. 

V. 4. érépas yhoooas, with other tongues, i. é. than their native 
tongue. ‘That Luke designed to state here that the disciples were 
suddenly endued with the power of speaking foreign languages, 
before unknown to them, would seem to be too manifest to admit of 
any doubt. It is surprising that such a writer as Neander should 
attempt to put a different construction on the text. He objects 
that the miracle would have been superfluous, inasmuch as the 
apostles are not known to have employed this gift of tongues in 
preaching the gospel. It may be replied, first, that we have not 
sufficient information concerning the labors of the apostles, to 
affirm that they may not have employed the endowment for that 
purpose ; and, secondly, that we are not obliged to regard such a 
use of it as the qnly worthy object of the miracle. It may have 
been designed to serve chiefly as an attestation of the truth of the 
gospel, and of the character of the apostles as divine messengers. 
It is certain, at least, that Paul entertained that view of the yAédooa 
spoken of in 1 Cor. 14, 22: ‘* Wherefore tongues are for a sign, 
not to them that believe, but to them that believe not.” The effect 
produced on this occasion (see v. 12) shows how well suited such 
a miracle was to impress the minds of those who witnessed it. A 
miracle, too, in this form, may have had a symbolic import, which 
added to its significancy. It was necessary that even the apostles 
should be led to entertain more enlarged views respecting the com- 
prehensive design -of the new dispensation. This sudden posses- 
sion of an ability to proclaim the salvation of Christ to men of all 
nations (even if we allow that it was not permanent), was adapted 
to recall their minds powerfully to the last command of the Sav- 
iour, and to make them feel that it was their mission to publish his 
name to the ends of the earth. Such a mode of conveying instruc- 
tion to them was not more indirect than that employed in the vision 
of Peter (10, 9 sq.), which was intended to teach the same truth. 
But we are not left to argue the question on grounds of this na- 
ture ; the testimony of Luke is explicit and decisive. Even critics 
who would explain away the reality of the miracle admit that it 


CHAP. II. 4—6.] NOTES. 39 


was the writer’s intention to record a miracle. Thus Meyer says: 
* The érepa: yAéooa are to be considered, according to the text, as 
absolutely nothing else than languages which were different from 
the native language of the speakers. ‘They were Galileans, and 
spoke now Parthian, Median, Persian, etc. ; therefore, foreign lan- 
guages, and those too— the point precisely wherein appeared the 
wonderful effect of the Spirit— unacquired languages (yAoooas 
xawais, Mark 16, 17), i. e. not previously learned by them. Ac- 
cordingly the text itself defines the sense of yAéooa: as that of lan- 
guages, and excludes as impossible the other explanations different 
from this, which some have attempted to impose on the word.” 


V. 5-13. Impression of the Miracle on the Multitude. 


V. 5. 8¢, transitive. — xatoixodvres, not merely = émdnuodrtes, 
sojourning, but dwelling there, whether for a season or permanent- 
ly. Many of them, no doubt, had fixed their abode at Jerusalem, 
as it was always an object of desire with the Jews who lived in 
foreign countries to return and spend the close of life in the land 
of their fathers. The prevalent belief, that the epoch had now ar- 
rived when the promised Messiah was about to appear, must have 
given increased activity to that desire. The writer mentions this 
class of Jews in distinction from the native inhabitants, because the 
narrative which follows represents that many were present who un- 
derstood different languages. ‘The number of these strangers was 
the greater on account of the festival which occurred at that time. 
— evdaBeis, devout, God-fearing ; 8, 2; Luke 2,25. This sense is 
peculiar to the Hellenistic Greek. The term is applied to those 
only whose piety was of the Old Testament type. —rér, sc. dvrar. 
The strong expression here is a phrase signifying from many and 
distant lands. A phrase of this kind has an aggregate sense, 
which is the true one, while that deduced from the import of the 
separate words is a false sense. 

V.6. yevoperns .... radrns. These words are obscure. The 
principal interpretations are the following. 1. ovis rairns refers 
to érépais yAdooas in v. 4, and the implication is, that the voices of 
those who spoke were so loud as to be heard at a distance, and in 
this way were the occasion of drawing together the multitude. 
This interpretation secures to ravrns a near antecedent, but has 
against it that perjs is singular, and not plural, and that the partici- 
ple is hardly congruous with the noun in that sense. Neander, 


40 NOTES. [CHAP. II. 6-9. 


who adopts this view, regards ¢wvy as a collective term. 2. dovy 
has been taken as synonymous with dnyy: Now when this report 
arose, i. e. the report concerning this. ‘The meaning is good, but 
opposed to the usage of the noun, while it puts ravrys in effect for 
epi rovrov, Which is a hard construction. Many of the older critics 
and our English translators understood the expression in this way. 
3. We may regard gers as repeating the idea of jyos in v. 2: 
Now when this sound —that of the descending Spirit — occurred.’ 
For that signification of dev, comp. John 3,8; Rev. 1, 15; 9,9; 
14, 2, etc. yevouerns appears to answer to éyévero in v. 2, and fa- 
vors this explanation. The objection to it is that ravrns forsakes the 
nearer for a remoter antecedent; but that may occur, if the latter 
be more prominent, so as to take the lead in the writer’s mind. See 
W. § 23.1. This meaning agrees with the context. The parti- 
cipial clause here may involve the idea of cause as well as time, 
and we may understand, therefore, that the sound in question was 
audible beyond the house where the disciples were assembled ; that 
it arrested the attention of those abroad, and led them to seek out 
the scene of the wonder. So Hess, Schrader, Meyer, De Wette, 
and others. — d.akéxrq = ydaooa. See v. 11. The term in its nar- 
rower sense here would be too narrow; for though some of the 
languages differed only as dialects, it was not true of all of them. 
— idia, his own, uniformly emphatic. W. § 22. 7. — Aadowvrev 
airay. We are not to understand by this that they all spoke in the 
languages enumerated, but that one of them employed this, and 
another that. In so brief a narrative, the writer must have passed 
over various particulars of the transaction. We may suppose that 
at this time the apostles had left the room where they assembled at 
first, and had gone forth to the crowd collected in the vicinity. 

V.'7. ov, which leads the sentence, belongs properly to «ioiv ; 
comp. 7, 48; W.§ 65.4. — mavres is emphatic. Had the speakers 
belonged to so many different countries, the wonder would have 
been diminished or removed. —TahiAaio. They were known as 
Galileans, because they were known as the disciples of Christ. 

V. 8. és, how, since they were all Galileans. The object of 
dxovouev follows in v. 11; but the connection having been so long 
suspended, the verb is ee repeated. 

V. 9. In the enumeration of the countries named in this verse 
and the next, the writer proceeds from the northeast to the west and 
south. —IIdp60. Parthia was on the northeast of Media and 


CHAP. II. 9, 10.] | NOTES. 41 


Hyrcania, and north of Aria, surrounded entirely by mountains. — 
MjSo0. Media bordered north on the Caspian Sea, west on Armenia, 
east on Hyrcania, and south on Persia. —’EAapiras, i. e. the inhab- 
itants of Elymais or Elam, which was east of the Tigris, north of 
Susiana (included in it Dan. 8, 2), and south of Media, of which 
Ptolemy makes it a part. — Iovdaiav. It has excited the surprise of 
‘some that Judea should be mentioned in this catalogue, because, it 
is said, no part of the wonder consisted in hearing Aramzan at Je- 
rusalem. But we need not view the writer’s design in that light. 
It was rather to inform us in how many languages the disciples ad- 
dressed the multitude on this occasion ; and as, after all, the native 
Jews formgd the greater part of the assembly, the account would 
have been deficient without mentioning Judea. It has been pro- 
posed to alter the text to "Idoupiav, but there is no authority for this. 
— The catalogue now passes from Cappadocia and Pontus on the 
east and northeast to the extreme west of Asia Minor. — ri ’Aciav. 
Phrygia being excluded here, Kuinoel and others have supposed 
Asia to be the same as Ionia; but Winer* says it cannot be shown 
that in the Roman age Ionia alone was called Asia. He thinks, 
with an appeal to Pliny, that we are to understand it as embracing 
Mysia, Lydia, and Caria, with Ephesus as the principal city. Oth- 
ers, as Battger,t whom De Wette follows, understand Mysia, Aolis, 
Jonia, Lydia, Caria. All admit that the term denoted not so much 
a definite region as a jurisdiction, the limits of which varied from 
time to time according to the plan of government which the Ro- 
mans adopted for their Asiatic provinces. 

V.10. @pvyiav. Phrygia was separated by the Taurus from Pisi- 
dia on the south, with Bithynia on the north, Caria, Lydia, and My- 
sia on the west, Galatia, Cappadocia, and Lycaonia on the east. — 
IlaudvAiay was on the Mediterranean, adjacent on other sides to 
Cilicia, Caria, and Pisidia. — ra pépn, x. r. X., the parts of Libya 
towards Cyrene. Libya was an extensive region on the west of 
Egypt. One of the principal cities there was Cyrene, on the sea, 
originally a Greek colony, but where at this time the Jews consti- 
tuted a fourth part of the population. See Jos. Antt. 14. '7. 2.— 
of emdnpodvyres ‘Popaior, i. e. the Romans resident at Jerusalem; 
comp. 17, 21. —"Iovdaioi re kal mpoondvror, a few critics restrict to 
‘Popaioe merely, but most (De Wet., Mey., Wiesl.) refer them to 





* Biblisches Realw6rterbuch, art. Asia. (Third edition.) 
+ Schauplatz der Wirksamkeit des Apostels Paulus, p. 23, 
6 ; 


42 NOTES. [CHAP. II. 10-13. 


all the preceding nouns. The Jews generally adopted the lan- 
guages of the countries where they resided. ‘The proselytes were 
originally heathen who had embraced Judaism. ‘The words sustain 
the same grammatical relation to Kpjres kai “ApaBes, or, at all events, 
are to be repeated after them. ‘The last two names follow as an 
after-thought, in order to complete the list. 

V. 11. The declarative form which the English version assigns 
to the sentence here is incorrect. The question extends to 6eod. 
See on v. 8. 

V. 12. ééicravro describes their astonishment at the occur- 
rence in general; dimrépouv, their perplexity at being unable to ac- 
count for it. — ri dv Oé\or, x. r. A. = ay attaches a tacit condition to 
the inquiry. W. § 43. 1; K. § 260. 4. What may this per- 
haps mean? ‘This is the question of the more serious party. ‘The 
hesitating form of it indicates the partial conviction which the mira- 
cle had wrought in their minds. 

V. 13. érepo .... €deyov. Among those who scoffed may 
have been some of the native inhabitants of the city, who, not un- 
derstanding the foreign languages spoken, regarded the discourse of 
the apostles as senseless because it was unintelligible to them. — 
XAevd{ovres is not so well supported as diayAevd{ovres, and expresses 
the idea less forcibly. Calvin: ‘ Nihil tam admirabile esse potest, 
quod non in ludibrium vertant, qui nulla Dei cura tanguntur.”” — 
drt, declarative. — yAevcous, sweet wine, not new, as in the English 
version. ‘The Pentecost fell in June, and the first vintage did not 
occur till August. It is true, yAedxos designated properly the sweet, 
unfermented juice of the grape ; but it was applied also to old wine 
preserved in its original state. The ancients had various ways of 
arresting fermentation. One of them, in use among the Greeks 
and Romans, was this: ** An amphora was taken and coated with 
pitch within and without; it was filled with mustum lixivium, i. e. 
the juice before the grapes had been fully trodden, and corked so 
as to be perfectly air-tight. It was then immersed in a tank of cold 
fresh water, or buried in wet sand, and allowed to remain for six 
weeks or two months. ‘The. contents, after this process, were 
found to remain unchanged for a year, and hence the name det 
yhedxos, i. e. semper mustum.” Dict. of Antt., art. Vinum.* Jahn 
says that sweet wine was produced also from dried grapes, by soak- 





* Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities, edited by W. Smith, 
London. The abbreviation in the text refers always to this work. 


CHAP, II. 13-17. ] NOTES. © | 43 


ing them in old wine, and then pressing them a second time. 
Archeol. § 69. This species of wine was very intoxicating. 


V. 14-36. The Discourse of Peter. 


The address embraces the following points : — first, defence of 
the character of the apostles ; secondly, the miracle explained as a 
fulfilment of prophecy ; thirdly, this effusion of the Spirit an act of 
the crucified, but now exalted Jesus; and, fourthly, his claim to be 
acknowledged as the true Messiah. 

V. 14. adv rots évdexa, i. e. in their name, and with their concur- 
rence in what he said. As the multitude was so great, it is not im- 
probable that some of the other apostles addressed different groups 
of them at the same time ; see on v. 6. On such an occasion they 
would all naturally pursue a very similar train of remark. — dydpes 
"IovSaioe. are the Jews born in Jerusalem ; of xarotxotvres are the for- 
eign Jews and Jewish converts. See on v. 5. — évoricacGe = IND, 
a Hellenistic word. | 

V. 15. ydp justifies the call to attention. It brings forward a 
refutation of the charge which had been made against them. — épa 
rpirn, i. e. about nine o’clock, A. M., according to our time. This 
was the first hour of public prayer, at which time the morning 
sacrifice was offered in the temple. During their festivals the Jews 
considered it unlawful to take food earlier than this, still more to 
drink wine. See Light., Hor. Hebr., ad loc. The other hours of 
prayer were the sixth, see 10, 4, and the ninth, 3, 1. 

V. 16. dda roiro, x. r. X., but this (which you witness) is that 
-which was said. The Greek identifies the prophecy with its fulfil- 
ment. — da rod apodyjrov, through (not by = vmé) the prophet, be- 
cause he was the messenger, not the author of the message. The 
expression recognizes the divine origin of the book which bears his 
name. 

V.17. The citation which follows from Joel 3, 1-5 (2, 28-32) 
runs for the most part in the words of the Seventy. The two or 
three verbal deviations from the Hebrew serve either to unfold more 
distinctly the sense of the original passage, or to enforce it. It is the 
object of the prophecy to characterize the Messianic dispensation 
under its two great aspects, — that of mercy and that of judgment. 
To those who believe, the gospel is ‘a savor of life unto life” ; 
but to those who disbelieve, it is ‘‘a savor of death unto death”; 
see 2 Cor. 2, 16. Under its one aspect, it was to be distinguished 


At NOTES. [CHAP. II. 17, 18. 


by the copious outpouring of the Divine Spirit on those who should 
acknowledge Christ; and under its other aspect, it was to be dis- 
tinguished by the signal punishment awaiting those who should dis- 
own his authority and reject him. — kal gorau... . jépars stands for 
{2° 2M 737}, rendered more closely in the Septuagint, cai €orat pera 
raira. Peter’s expression denotes always in the New Testament 
the age of the Messiah, which the Scriptures represent as the 
world’s last great moral epoch. The prophet designates the same 
period under a more general phrase. Again, Peter places Aéyer 6 
és at the beginning of the declaration, the prophet at the close of 
it. The position of the words here fixes attention at once upon the 
source of the prophecy, and prepares the mind to listen to it as 
God’s utterance. — éxyed is future, a later Greek form. W. § 13. 
3; K. § 154, R. 1.— kai (consequent.) mpopntetcovow, and thus 
they shall prophesy. 'This verb in the New Testament signifies, not 
merely to foretell future events, but to communicate religious truth 
in general under a divine inspiration. It corresponds in this use to 
483] in the original passage ; see Gesen. Lex. s.v. The order of 
the next two clauses in the Hebrew and Septuagint is the reverse of 
that adopted here; viz. first, of mpeoBurepa .... évumvacbyoovtat, 
then of veavioxo..... dyovra.  Hengstenberg* suggests that the 
change may have been intentional, in order to place the youth with 
the sons and daughters, and to assign to the aged a place of honor. 
— éwrvios évurmacOnoovra, shall dream with dreams, the dative, as in 
4,17; 23,24. W.§ 58.3. Some authorities have évimna, which 
was probably substituted for the other as an easier construction. 

V. 18. xatye = DJ) annexes an emphatic addition, and even. — 
pov, Which is wanting in the Hebrew, is retained here from the’ 
Septuagint. The prophet declares that no condition of men, how- 
ever ignoble, would exclude them from the promise. ‘The apostle 
cites the prophet to that effect; but takes occasion from the lan- 
guage — dothovs pov— which describes their degradation in the eyes 
of men, to suggest by way of contrast their exalted relationship to 
God. Bengel: “Servi secundum carnem.... iidem servi Dei.” 
Similar to this is the language of Paul in 1 Cor. 7, 22: ‘ For he 
that is called in the Lord, being a servant, is the Lord’s freeman ; 
likewise also he that is called, being free, is Christ’s servant.” If we 





* Christology of the Old Testament, and a Commentary on the Predic- 
tions of the Messiah by the Prophets, Vol. III. p. 140, Keith’s Translation. 


CHAP. II. 18, 19.] NOTES. 45 


cast the eye back over this and the preceding verse, it will be seen 
that the effusion of the Spirit was to be universal as to the classes 
of persons that were to participate in it; in other words, it was to 
be without distinction of sex, age, or rank. — The modes of divine 
revelation and of the Spirit’s operation, which are specified in this 
passage, were among the more extraordinary to which the Hebrews 
were accustomed under the ancient economy. ‘These, after having 
been suspended for so long a time, were now, at the opening of 
the Christian dispensation, renewed in more than their former power. 
The prophecy relates chiefly, I think, to these special communica- 
tions of the Spirit, which were granted to the first Christians. The 
terms of the prophecy direct us naturally to something out of the 
ordinary course; and when we add to this that the facts recorded 
in the Acts and the Epistles sustain fully that view of the language, 
it must appear arbitrary, as well as unnecessary, to reject such an 
interpretation. Yet the prophecy has indirectly a wider scope. It 
portrays in reality the character of the entire dispensation. Those 
special manifestations of the Spirit, at the beginning, marked the 
economy as one that was to be eminently distinguished by the 
Spirit’s agency. They were a pledge, that those in all ages who 
_ embrace the gospel should equal the most favored of God’s ancient 
people ; they enjoy a clearer revelation, are enlightened, sanctified 
by a Spirit more freely imparted, may rise to the same or higher 
religious consolations and attainments. 

V. 19. The apostle now holds up to view the other side of the 
subject. He adduces the part of the prophecy which foretells the 
-doom of those who reject Christ and spurn his salvation. Having 
appealed to the hopes, the apostle turns here to address himself to 
the fears of men; he would persuade them by every motive to es- 
cape the punishment which awaits the unbelieving and disobedient. 
See v. 40 and 43 below. In the interpretation of the passage be- 
fore us, I follow those who understand it as having primary refer- 
ence to the calamities which God inflicted on the Jews in connec- 
tion with the overthrow of Jerusalem, and the destruction of the 
Jewish state and nation. The reasons for this opinion are briefly 
these: — 1. The law of correspondence would lead us to apply this 
part of the prophecy to the same period to which the other part has 
been applied, i. e. to the early times of the gospel. 2. The ex- 
pression, the day of the Lord, in v. 20, according to a very com- 
mon use in the Hebrew prophets, denotes a day when God comes 


46 NOTES. [cHAP, II. 19. 


to make known his power in the punishment of his enemies, a day 
of the signal display of his vengeance for the rejection of long con- 
tinued mercies, and the commission of aggravated sins. ‘The sub-. 
version of the Jewish state was such an occasion. It appropriates 
fully every trait of that significant designation. 93. Part of the lan- 
guage here coincides almost verbally with that in Matt. 24,29; and 
if the language there, as understood by most interpreters, describes 
the downfall of the Jewish state,* we may infer from the similarity 
that the subject of discourse is the same in both places. 4. The 
entire phraseology, when construed according to the laws of pro- 
phetic language, is strikingly appropriate to represent the unsur- 
passed horrors and distress which attended the siege and destruction 
of Jerusalem, and to announce the extinction of the Jewish power 
and the glory of the Jewish worship which that catastrophe involved. 
Yet here too (see on v. 18) we are to recognize the wider scope of 
the prophecy. ‘The destruction of the Jews is held forth by the 
apostle, as a type of the destruction which is to come upon every 
rejecter of the gospel; see v. 21. 

For the sake of contrast, Peter inserts the words ava, onyeia, kdra, 
which are not in the Hebrew. répara év r@ ovpava, onpeia emi ris 
ys, means prodigies celestial and terrestrial, such as may appear 
in the air or on the earth; in other words, prodigies of every sort, 
and of the most portentous kind. The idea is, that calamities were 
to ensue, equal in severity and magnitude to those which the most 
fearful portents are supposed to announce. ‘The mode of speaking 
is founded on the popular idea, that, when great events are about to 
occur, wonderful phenomena foretoken their approach. Hence 
what the prophet would affirm is, that, disasters and judgments were 
coming such as men are accustomed to associate with the most ter- 
rific auguries ; but he does not mean necessarily (yet see Heng. 
Christ. III. p. 133) that the auguries themselves were to be expected, 
or decide whether the popular belief on the subject was true or 
false. — aiva, wip, drpida Kamvod, stand in apposition with zépara kat 
onueia, and show in what they consisted: blood, perhaps rained on 
the earth (De Wet.), or,as in Egypt (Ex. 7, 17), infecting the 
streams and rivers (Heng.); fire, i. e. appearances of it in the air, 
and vapor of smoke, dense smoke, hence = j¥y niv7°n, pillars, 





* This view is defended in the Bibliotheca Sacra, 1843, p. 531 sq., and 
controverted in the same work, 1850, p. 452 sq. 


CHAP. Il. 19-22.] NOTES. 47 


clouds of smoke, which darken the heavens and earth. Many have 
supposed these terms to signify directly slaughter and conflagration, 
but their grammatical relation to répara kai onpeia decides that they 
are the portents themselves, not the calamities portended. That 
view, too, confounds the day of the Lord with the precursors of the 
day. 

V. 20. 6 fduos .... eis oxdros, the sun shall be turned into dark-: 
ness. Its light shall be withdrawn ; the heavens shall become black. 
A day is at hand which will be one of thick gloom, of sadness, and 
woe. For the frequency and significance of this figure in the 
prophets, see Ezek. 32, 7; Is. 13, 10; Am. 5, 18. 20, etc. —7 
cedjm. Repeat here peraorpapycera. The moon, too, shall give 
forth signs of the coming distress. It shall exhibit an appearance 
like blood. Men shall see there an image of the carnage and mis- 
ery which are to be witnessed on earth. — émipara, illustrious, sig- 
nal in its character as an exhibition of divine justice. It conveys 
the idea of 8113, fearful, but is less definite. 

V. 21. ds dv, whoever; v.39; 3, 22. 23; 7, 3, etc. a, in 
such cases, modifies the pronoun rather than the verb. W. § 43. _ 
3. b.— emixahéonra .... xupiov, shall call upon the name of the 
Lord (i. e. Christ, comp. v. 36; 9, 14; 22, 16; Rom. 10, 18), not 
simply upon the Lord, but upon him as possessing the attributes 
and sustaining to men the relations of which his name is the index. 
Comp. the Note on 22, 16.— caOyjoera, shall be saved from the 
doom of those who reject Christ, and be admitted to the joys of his- 
kingdom. 

V. 22. “Icpandira, in the New Testament — “IovSaio., here both 
the native and foreign Jews. — Nafwpatov — Nafapaios. ‘The former 
is the broader Syriac pronunciation. See Win. Chald. Gr.,* p. 12. 
The epithet is added for the sake of distinction, as Jesus was not an 
uncommon name among the Jews. — dipa.... eis iuas, a man from 
(on the part of) God accredited unto you, lit. shown forth, confirmed, 
25,7. ‘The meaning is, that in the miracles which he performed he 
had God’s fullest sanction to all which he did and taught, that is, to 
his claim to be received as the Messiah, the promised Saviour of men. 
Some put a comma after cod, and explain, a man (sent) from God, 
accredited as such by miracles, ete. The ultimate idea remains the 
same, since to sanction his mission as from God was the same thing 





* Second edition, translated from the German by the writer, Andover, 1845. 


48 NOTES. [ CHAP. II. 22-24. 


as to sustain his truth as to what he claimed to be. The first is the 
more correct view, because it renders the ellipsis — sent — unneces- 
sary. It is not common to omit that word. dé follows the participle, 
not ind, because the approbation was indirect, i. e. testified through 
miracles. W. § 51. — dvuvduect kai répace kal onpeiors form obvi- 
ously an intensive expression, but they are not synonymous with 
each other. - Miracles are called duvdpes, because they are wrought 
by divine power; répara, prodigies, because they appear inexpli- 
cable to men; and onpeia, signs, because they attest the character 
or claims of those who perform them (2 Cor. 12, 12). (See Olsh. 
on Matt. 8,1.) It cannot be said that the terms are used always 
with a distinct consciousness of that difference. — ois is attracted 
into the case of its antecedent. — kai after xa##s good authorities 
omit. If retained, it must connect oidSare with ézoince, or else 
strengthen avroi: also yourselves as well as we. 

V. 23.  rodrov is both resumptive and emphatic; see Matt. 24, 
13; 1 Cor. 6, 4. W.§ 23. 4.—7) apiopery Bovdy, according to 
the established (firmly fixed, Luke 22, 22) counsel ; the dative is 
that of rule or conformity. W.{§ 31. 3.b.; K. § 285. 3.  Bovdy 
and mpoyvwors may differ here as antecedent and consequent, since 
God’s foreknowledge results properly from his purpose. — éxdoror, 
delivered up to you, i. e. by Judas. — AaBdvres the best editors re- 
gard as an addition to the text. — dca: yepdv dvopov, by the hands or 
hand (if after Griesbach, Lachmann, and others, we read xezpos) 
of lawless ones (partitive, hence without the article, see on 5, 16), 
i. e. of the heathen, as Pilate and the Roman soldiers; comp. Wisd. 
17, 2; 1 Cor. 9,21. The indignity which Christ suffered was the 
greater on account of his being crucified by the heathen. See 3, 
13. dvduov may agree with yewpav, lawless hands; but as the ad- 
jective must refer still to the heathen, it is not so easy a combination 
as the other. — mpoorméavtes, Sc. T6 otavpd, having fastened to the 
cross, 1. e. with nails driven through the hands and feet ; John 20, 
25.27. See Bynzeus de Morte Christi, L. Ill. c.6; Jahn’s Archeol. 
§ 262. He imputes the act of crucifixion to them because they were 
the instigators of it; comp. 4, 10; 10, 39. —dvei\are is first aorist, 
an Alexandrian form; W. § 13.1; 8. § 63. 11. R. 

V. 24. dvéornoe, raised up, not into existence, as in 3, 22, but 
from the dead. The context.demands this sense of the verb; see 
v. 32. — ras ddivas tod Oavdrov, pains of death, coincides with the 
Septuagint for Ps. 18, 5, nya~92n, cords of death. The Greek 


CHAP. II. 24 —27.] NOTES. 49 


involves the same idea, but relinquishes the figure. It is not cer- 
tain, indeed, that the words are quoted. ‘The assertion, that ddiv 
means also cord, has no proof. With that view of the word, Luke 
would have put adrod in the plural, out of regard to the figure. — 
xaort .. .. Suvarov, because it was not possible, since the Divine pur- 
pose cannot fail. The confirmatory ydp shows that to be the nature 
of the impossibility in the writer’s mind. 

V. 25. The quotation is from Ps. 16, 8-11, in accordance with 
the Septuagint. It will be observed that in v. 29-31 Peter takes 
pains to show that the portion of the Psalm under consideration there 
could not have referred to David, but had its fulfilment in Christ. 
In 13, 36, Paul too denies the applicability of that passage to David, 
and insists on its exclusive reference to the Messiah. We may 
conclude, therefore, that they regarded the entire Psalm as Messi- 
anic ; for we have in it but one speaker from commencement to 
end, and in other respects such a marked unity of thought and 
structure, that it would be an arbitrary procedure to assign one part 
of it to David and another to Christ. See Prof. Stuart’s Interpre- 
tation of this Psalm in Bibl. Repos., 1831, p. 51 sq. — eis airdv, in 
reference to him.— rpowpepnr, not foresaw, but saw before me, 
looked unto him as my only helper and support. It answers to 
"nav, except that this marks more distinctly the effort made in or- 
der to keep the mind in that posture. — ér, because, states why the 
eye is thus turned unto Jehovah. — éx deé:év describes one’s position 
as seen off from the right. A protector at the right hand is one 
who is near, and can afford instantly the succor needed. — iva is 
telic, that. 

V. 26. evddpdvd. On the augmentin verbs which begin with «3, 
see W. § 12.3; K. § 125. R. 1. — 7 yAdood pou stands for 1133, my 
glory, i. e. soul, whose dignity the Hebrews recognized in that way. 
The Greek has substituted the instrument which the soul uses in 
giving expression to its joy. We may render both verbs as present 
if we suppose them to describe a permanent state of mind. K. 
§ 256. 4. — 271 8 kai, but further also, climacteric, as in Luke 14, 26. 
— 1 odpé pov, my flesh, body as distinguished from the soul. — xa- 
raoknvecet, Shall rest, viz. in the grave, as defined by the next verse. 
— én’ dmidi, in hope, = 1032, in confidence, i. e. of a speedy res- 
toration to life. ‘The sequel exhibits the ground of this confident 
hope. 

V.27. dr.... eis adov, because (not that) thou wilt not abandon 

7 


50 NOTES. [CHAP. I1, 27—90. 


my soul unto hades.  pvyyv pov = D3}, me, but more emphatic 
than the pronoun. édys = 9ixw, which denotes properly the place 
of the dead, but also, by a frequent personification, death itself, con- 
sidered as a rapacious destroyer. See Gesen. Heb. Lex.s. v. The 
sense then is: Thou wilt not give me up as a prey to death; he 
shall not have power over me, to dissolve the body and cause it to 
return to dust. On the elliptical ddov, see K. § 263. b. Lachmann 
reads anv after A, B,C, D, and other authorities. — idciv, to see, 
experience, Luke 2, 26. 

V. 28. éyvaepicas, x. tr. d., thou didst make known to me the ways 
of life, i. e. those which lead from death to life. The event was 
certain, and hence, though future, could be spoken of as past. 
The meaning is, that God would restore him to life, after having 
been put to death and laid in the grave. The Hebrew admits of 
the same interpretation. Kuinoel, De Wette, Meyer, concede this 
to be the sense which Peter attached to the words. — pera rod rpoc- 
omov cov, with (not by = dia) thy presence, i. e. with thee where 
thou art, in heaven. ‘The Redeemer was assured that he would not 
only escape the power of death, but ascend to dwell in the immedi- 
ate presence of Godon high. It was for that “joy set before him, 
that he endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at 
the right hand of the throne of God.” 

V. 29. The object of the remark here is to show that the pas- 
sage cited above could not have referred to David. — e§év, sc. éori, 
not gore, it is lawful, proper. —pera wappynotas, with freedom, without 
fear of being thought deficient in any just respect to his memory. 
His death was recorded in the Old Testament; no one pretended 
that he had risen, and the Psalm, therefore, could not apply to 
him. — David is called warpidpyns, as being the founder of the royal 
family. This title in its stricter use belonged to the founders of the 
nation. — év jpiv, among us, here in the city. ‘The sepulchre of 
David was on Mount Zion, where most of the kings of Judah were 
buried ; see on 5,6. The tomb was well known in Peter’s day. 
Josephus says, that it had been opened both by Hyrcanus and 
Herod, in order to rifle it of the treasures which it was supposed to 
contain. 

V. 30. mpodyrns, a prophet, i. e. divinely inspired (see on v. 17), 
and so competent to utter the prediction. — odv, therefore (Mey.) ; 
since, unless David meant himself, he must have meant the Mes- 
siah, De Wette renders now, transitive. — kat eidas, and knowing, 


CHAP. II. 30—34.] NOTES. | 51 


viz. that which follows. This knowledge he received from the 
prophet Nathan, as related 2 Sam. 7, 12. 16; see also Ps. 182, 11; 
89, 35-37. The resurrection of Christ in its full historical sense 
involved two points, — restoration to life, and elevation to perma- 
nent regal power. Peter inserts the remark made here to show 
that David, in predicting the main fact, had a view also of Christ’s 
office as a Sovereign. — xafica, sc. twa, to cause one to sit, place 
him, comp. 1 Cor. 6, 4 (Whl., Mey., De Wet.) ; or, intransitive, that 
one should sit (Rob.). This descendant was to occupy the throne 
as ruler in Zion, as Messiah ; comp. Ps. 2,6. The Greek omits rua 
often before the infinitive. K. § 238. R.3.e.— After daqivos airod, 
the received text adds 7d xara cdpxa dvaotncew tov Xpiordv. Scholz 
retains the words, but most editors omit them, or mark them as un- 
supported. 

V. 31. apoiddy repeats the idea both of apodpyrns and <idds. 
Having the knowledge derived from the sources which those terms 
specify, David could speak of the Messiah in the manner here 
represented. 

V.32. od may be neuter (Mey.), of which, viz. his resurrection ; 
or masculine, whose, 5,32; 13, 31. De Wette gives no opinion. 
The verb is the nearer antecedent. 

V. 33. rH Seka rod Ocod, not by (Mey.), but to the right hand of 
God,see 5,31. The connection, especially v. 34, guides us neces- 
sarily to that sense. The later Greek often employs the dative to 
denote whither. W. 31. 2. — ody, therefore ; since the exaltation 
of Christ was a necessary consequent of the resurrection, see on v. 
. 28, 30; or, according to a looser view of the connection, now, con- 
tinuative (De Wet.). — rv émayyeiay rod dyiov mvevparos, 1. e. the 
Holy Spirit promised ; see on 1,4. The genitive is that of apposi- 
tion. — é&éyee. The effusion of the Spirit which is ascribed to God 
in v. 17 is ascribed here to Christ. — Premere refers to the tongues 
of fire; dxovere to the languages spoken. 

V. 34. ydp confirms tiWwbeis. The exaltation was not only in- 
cident to the resurrection, but was the subject of an express predic- 
tion, and that prediction could not apply to David; for he did not 
ascend to heaven, i. e. to be invested with glory and power at the 
right hand of God. ‘The order of thought, says De Wette, would 
have been plainer thus: Fur David says, Sit at my right hand, 
&c.; but he himself did not ascend into heaven,i. e. he says this 
not of himself, but the Messiah. —Aéye:, viz. in Ps. 110,1. In 


52 NOTES. [CHAP. II. 34-36. 


Matt. 22, 43, and Mark 12, 36, the Saviour recognizes David as the 
author of the Psalm, and attributes to him a divine inspiration in 
speaking thus of the Messiah. He cites the same passage as proof 
of David’s acknowledged inferiority to himself. — xa6ov, imperative 
for the purer xcaOno0, W. § 14.4; Mt. § 236. — é« deésay, i. e. as the 
partner of his throne. ‘In the New Testament, when Christ is 
represented as sitting at the right hand of divine majesty, Heb. 1, 3 ; 
or at the right hand of God, v. 33, above, and Heb. 10, 12; or at 
the right of the throne of God, Heb. 12, 2; participation in su- 
preme dominion is most clearly meant. Compare 1 Pet. 3, 22; 
Rom. 8, 34; Mark 16, 19; Phil. 2,6-11; Eph. 1,20-23. At 
the same time, the comparison of these passages will show most 
clearly that Christ’s exaltation at the right hand of God means his 
being seated on the mediatorial throne as the result and reward of 
his sufferings (see particularly Phil. 2, 6-11, and comp. Heb. 12, 
2); and that the phrase in question never means the original do- 
minion which Christ as Logos or God possesses. The sacred 
writers never speak respecting the Logos, considered simply in his 
divine nature, as being seated at the right hand of God; but only 
of the Logos incarnate, or the Mediator, as being seated there. So 
in Heb. 1, 3, it is after the expiation made by the Son of God, that 
he is represented as seating himself at the right hand of the divine 
majesty. And that this mediatorial dominion is not to be consid- 
ered simply as the dominion of the divine nature of Christ as such, 
is plain from the fact, that, when the mediatorial office is fulfilled, the 
kingdom of the Mediator as such is to cease. Moreover, that the 
phrase, to sit at the right hand of God, or of the throne of God, 
does not of itself mean original divine dominion, is clear from the 
fact, that Christ assures his faithful disciples they shall sit down with 
him on his throne, even as he sat down with the Father on his 
throne, Rey. 3, 21. It is exaltation, then, in consequence of obedi- 
ence and sufferings, which is designated by the phrase in question.” 
See Prof. Stuart’s Comm. on Hebrews, p. 559 sq. 

V.35. és dv,x.7r.. The dominion here, which Christ re- 
ceived, belonged to him as Mediator; and it is to cease, therefore, 
when the objects of his kingdom as Mediator are accomplished. 
Comp. 1 Cor. 15, 23-28. This verse recognizes distinctly that 
limitation. 

V. 36. mas .... Iopand, all the house, race, of Israel. otkos ap- 
pears to omit the article, as having the nature of a proper name. 


CHAP. II. 36—39. | NOTES. 53 


W..§ 17. 10. —éri kai, x. 7. d., that God made him both Lord and 
Christ, to wit, this one the Jesus, whom, etc. odrov tov "Incodr is 
in apposition with avror. 


V. 37-42. Effect of the Discourse in the Conversion of Three 
Thousand. 


V. 37.  xarevdynoav rh kapdia, were pierced in the heart; dative 
of the sphere in which, Rom. 4, 20; 1 Cor. 14,20. W.§ 31.3. 
The verb expresses forcibly the idea of pungent sorrow and alarm. 
— ri rojcopev, What shall, or should (W.§ 41.6), we do? The 
answer to the question shows that it related to the way of escape 
from the epcnenueneen of their guilt. 

V. 38. ént 1G dvopate "Incov Xpiorod belongs to the nearest verb : 
upon the name of Jesus Christ as the foundation of the baptism (W. 
§ 52. c), i. e. with an acknowledgment of him in that act as being 
what his name imports (see on vy. 21), to wit, the sinner’s only 
hope, his Redeemer, Justifier, Lord, final Judge. We see from 
v. 40, that Luke has given only an epitome of Peter’s instructions 
on this occasion. The usual formula in relation to baptism is eis 
To dvoua, as in 8,16; 19,5. It may have been avoided here as a 
matter of euphony, since eis follows in the next clause (De Wet.). 
— eis ddecw dpapriav, in order to the forgiveness of sins, we con- 
nect naturally with both the preceding verbs. This clause states the 
motive or object which should induce them to repent and be bap- 
tized. It enforces the entire exhortation, not one part of it to the 
exclusion of the other. 

V. 39. ois réxvois iudv, your descendants, 13, 33. — aor trois 
eis paxpav, to all those afar off, i. e. the distant nations or heathen. 
So, among others, Calvin, Bengel, Olshausen, Harless, De Wette, 
Neander. The expression was current among the Jews in that 
sense ; comp. Zech. 6, 15; Is. 49, 1; 57,19; Eph. 2,17. Even 
the Rabbinic writers employed it as synonymous with the heathen. 
(Schéttg. Hor. Heb. Vol. I. p. 761.) It has been objected, that this 
explanation supposes Peter to have been already aware that the 
gospel was to be preached to the Gentiles; whereas, it is said, he 
afterwards hesitated on the subject, and needed a special revelation 
to point out to him his duty ; see 10,10 sq. But the objection mis- 
states the ground of the hesitation ; it related to the terms on which 
the Gentiles were to be acknowledged as Christians, not to the fact 
itself. On this point how is it possible that he should have doubted ? 


54 NOTES. [CHAP. II. 39-42. 


The Jews in general, who expected a Messiah at all, believed in. the 
universality of his reign. ‘The prophets foretold distinctly that the 
Gentiles under him should form one people with the Jews, that 
they should both acknowledge the same God, and be acknowledged 
of him; see, e. g. Mich. 4, 1 sq.; Am. 9, 12; Is. 2, 2sq. 5; 40,5; 54, 
4sq., etc. Add to this, that the Saviour himself before his ascen- 
sion had charged his disciples to go into all the world and preach 
the gospel to every creature. The relation in which the Gentile be- 
lievers were to stand to Judaism, how far they were to practise its 
rites, and in that respect assimilate to the Jews, was not so well un- 
derstood. On that question, it is true, they needed and received fur- 
ther instruction as to the course to be pursued. Those (e. g. Mey.) 
who reject the foregoing explanation suppose maou ois eis paxpav to 
denote the foreign Jews. But they are included already in tpi, 
since many of those addressed were foreign Jews. This sense 
renders the addition superfluous. — dcous dv, x. tr. X., whomsoever 
(see v. 21) the Lord shall have called, = fut. exact. in Latin. 
W. § 43.3.b. The expression imports, that as many would secure 
a part in the promise as it should prove that the divine purpose had 
embraced. 

V. 40. Copies fluctuate between Sseuapripero and Scepapriparo. 
The imperfect agrees best with the next verb. — cOnre, save your- 
selves. For this middle sense, see W. § 40. 2.— do tis yeveds, 
k. t A. from this perverse (Phil. 2, 15) generation, i. e. from par- 
ticipation in their guilt and doom; comp. 1 Cor. 11, 32; Gal. 1, 4. 

V. 41. of pev ody, x. 7.d., they therefore (those mentioned in v. 
37) having received gladly his word; comp. 8, 25; 15, 3. 30; 
28, 5. This is better, says De Wette, than the substantive con- 
struction : those who received (Kuin., Mey., Eng. Vers.). See on 
1, 6. — yal, souls, persons, v. 43; 3,23; 7, 14; 27,37. The 
frequency of this sense may be Hebraistic, but not the sense itself. 

V.42. mpockaprepotryres, x. tr. d., constantly attending upon the 
teaching of the apostles; they sought to know more and more of 
the gospel which they had embraced. — kai rj xowovia, and the com- 
munication (or contribution), i.e. of money or other supplies for the 
poor (Heinr., Kuin., Olsh.); the fellowship, i. e. the community, 
oneness of spirit and effort which bound the first Christians to each 
other (Bng., Mey., Rob.); the communion, meals in common, 
ayaa, which were followed by the Lord’s Supper (Bez., Grot., 
De Wet.) ; the Sacrament itself (Lightf., Est., Wlf.). I prefer the 


CHAP. II. 42—44.] NOTES. 55 


first sense of this doubtful word, because all the other nouns denote 
an act, not a state of mind or feeling; because the participle ap- 
plies to an act rather than an abstract quality (which are objections 
to the second sense) ; because this use of the term is justified by 
Rom. 15, 26; 2 Cor. 8, 4; especially Heb. 13, 16; and because, 
as the contributions would naturally be made at their meetings, the 
several nouns relate then to a common subject, viz. their religious 
assemblies. It may be added, that their liberality towards the poor 
was so characteristic of the first Christians, that this sketch of their 
religious habits might be expected to include that particular. The 
English version unites dzooré\ov with both nouns : the apostles’ doc- 
trine and fellowship. With that combination we should have had 
regularly the genitive after the second noun, without a repetition of 
the article. See W. § 18. 4. Some (Vulg., Blmf.) assume a 
hendiadys : the communion in the breaking of bread. ‘The analy- 
sis is not only awkward, but opposed by 17 before kAdoev. — 77 
kAdoet Tod Gprov denotes the breaking of the bread as performed at 
the Lord’s Supper. See 20,7. 11; 1 Cor. 10,16. The expres- 
sion itself may designate an ordinary meal, as in Luke 24, 35; 
but that here would be an unmeaning notice. There can be no 
doubt that the Eucharist, at this period, was preceded uniformly by 
a common repast, as was the case when the ordinance was insti- 
tuted. Most scholars hold that this was the prevailing usage in the 
first centuries after Christ. We have traces of that practice in 
1 Cor. 11, 20 sq., and, in all probability, inv. 46 below. The 
bread only being mentioned here, the Catholics appeal to this pas- 
sage as proving that their custom of distributing but one element 
(the cup they withhold from the laity) is the apostolic one. It is a 
case obviously in which the leading act of the transaction gives 
name to the transaction itself. 


V. 43-47. Benevolence of the First Christians ; their Joy, their 
Increase. 


V. 43. 080s, fear, religious awe. — don Wuxf, upon every soul — 
of those who heard of these events, viz. the descent of the Spirit, 
the miracle or tongues, the conversion of such a multitude ; comp. 
5, 5. —odXa in this position belongs to both nouns, see 17, 12. 
W. § 35. 2. 

V. 44. éni rd adrd, not harmonious (Calv., Kuin.), but together, 
as in y. 1, i. e. they met daily in one place, as explained in v. 46. 


56 NOTES. [CHAP. II. 44—47. 


— kul elyov.... xowd, and they had all things common, looked upon 
their possessions not as their own, but held them as subject to the 
use of the church as they were needed. ‘The next words refer to 
the act of disposing of their property, and hence these describe the 
antecedent principle or spirit which prompted the act. ‘The remark 
is defined by ovde cis .... Cheyev.... etvar in 4, 32. 

V. 45. ra xrqpara kat ras tiadpées, their estates, lands, and oth- 
er possessions. — avrda, them, i. e. the proceeds of the sale. W. 
§ 22. 3.— xaddre .... efxe, as any one from time to time had need. 
dy with the indicative in a relative sentence denotes a recurring act. 
W.§ 438. 3.a. As this clause qualifies also émimpacxoy, it shows 
that they did not alienate their property at once, but parted with it 
as occasion required. 

V. 46. cpodvpaddy, as in v. 1.— kar oikov, from house to house, 
in different houses (Est., Kuin., Neand.); or, at home, in a private 
assembly, in opposition to év 7@ iep@ (Bng., Olsh., Mey., De Wet.). 
év in the place of car would have removed the ambiguity. Neander 
observes that a single room would hardly have contained the present 
number of converts. He supposes that, in addition to their daily 
resort to the temple, they met in smaller companies, at different 
places; that they here received instruction from their teachers or 
one another, and prayed and sang together ; and, as the members of 
a common family, closed their interview with a repast, at which 
bread and wine were distributed in memory of the Saviour’s last 
meal with his disciples. In conformity with this view, kAavres dprov 
may refer to their breaking bread in connection with the Sacrament, 
and pereAdpBavoy rpopjs to their reception of food for ordinary pur- 
poses. 

V.47. xapw, favor, Luke 2, 52. — robs cafopévovs, those who 
are saved, as in 1 Cor. 1, 18; 2 Cor. 2,15. See W. § 47. 5, last 
remark. ‘The Greek asserts, not a purpose, but a fact. The ex- 
pression involves the doctrine, that those who have embraced the 
gospel are sure of salvation. 


CHAP. III. 1, 2.] NOTES. 57 


CHAPTER III. 


V.1-10. Healing of the Lame Man by Peter and John. 


V. 1. éni 1rd aire, together, in company, see 1, 15. — ry éwarny. 
This was our three o’clock, P. M., at which time the evening sacri- 
fice was offered; see on 2, 15. The apostles and other believers 
at Jerusalem had not yet withdrawn from the Jewish worship (see 
also 21, 23 sq.), and it is probable that most of them continued to 
adhere to the services of the temple, until the destruction of the 
temple abolished them. But the spirit with which they performed 
these services was no longer the Jewish spirit. Instead of regard- 
ing their compliance with the ordinances of the law as an act of 
merit, they recognized Christ as “the end of the law for righteous- 
ness to every one that believeth.” They viewed the sacrifices 
which continued to be offered, not as having any efficacy to procure 
the remission of sin, or as typical of an atonement still to be made, 
but as realized already in the death of Christ, and hence as memen- 
tos, as often as they beheld them or participated in them, of the 
“one sacrifice for sins” effected “through the offering of the 
body of Jesus Christ.” As in the case of circumcision, so un- 
doubtedly the Jewish Christians relinquished the other rites of Ju- 
daism only by degrees. ‘They were brought fully to this, in part 
by obtaining a clearer insight into the relation of the ancient econo- 
my to the new, and in part by the occurrence of national circum- 
stances which hastened the result. From the Jewish synagogues, 
on the contrary, they must have separated at once, as soon as their 
distinctive views became known. It was impossible to avow the 
Christian faith, and remain connected with those communities. 
Compare the Note on 9,2. We have seen in the second chapter, 
that, in connection with the worship of the temple, the believers at 
Jerusalem maintained separate religious worship among themselves. 

V..2. éBaord{ero, was carried just then. The verb is imperfect, 
because the act was a relative one. — ériovy is imperfect, because it 
states what was customary. — Hv Aeyouevny apaiay, which is called 
beautiful. Most interpreters think that this was the gate described 
by Josephus (Bel. Jud. 5. 5. 3; Antt. 15. 11.3), which was com- 
posed chiefly of Corinthian brass, and which excelled all the other 
gates of the temple in the splendor of its appearance. Josephus 

8 


58 NOTES. [cHAP. III. 2-6. 


does not mention it under this appellation. It is supposed to have 
been on the east side, leading from the court of the Gentiles into 
the court of the Israelites. The folds of this gate were fifty cubits 
high and forty broad, and were covered with plates of gold and 
silver. Luke’s epithet — épaiay — could not have had a more per- 
tinent application. Some have thought that the gate to which he 
refers must have been one of the outer gates, because what is re- 
lated in v. 11 sq. took place in Solomon’s porch, which was in the 
court of the Gentiles. But we may suppose, as Lightfoot suggests, 
that, the apostles having been with the lame man into the temple, 
i.e. the court of the Israelites (see v. 8), were returning, and had 
reached the court of the Gentiles, when the concourse of the peo- 
ple there spoken of took place. — rod aireiv, telic, in order to ask. 
This use of the infinitive with rod to denote the object for which an 
act is performed (comp. 18, 10; 26, 18; Mark 4, 3, etc.), results 
naturally from the nature of the genitive as the whence-case. ‘The 
older writers supplied évexa or xdpw; but the construction is neither 
elliptical nor Hebraistic. W. § 45. 4. b.; S. § 165. 3. 2; K. 
§ 308. 2. b. —cioropevopever eis rd iepdv. If a noun follows an in- 
transitive verb compounded with a preposition, it is common to 
repeat the preposition before the noun; see v. 3. 8; 22,6; Matt. 
7, 23,etc. W. 4 56. 2. 

V. 3. és, who, stands often when oidros, this one, would be the 
ordinary connective. K. § 334. 3.— dae could be omitted, as 
inv. 2. It is not strictly pleonastic, but expands the idea of jpora, 
W. § 67. 2. y. 

V.4. Bréwov cis juas. Their object appears to have been to 
gain his attention more fully to their words; so that, as they said, 
“In the name of Jesus Christ,” etc. (v. 6), he might understand 
to whom he was indebted for the benefit conferred upon him. 

V. 5. émeixev, sc. trav votv, comp. Luke 14, 7. — 11, something 
in the way of alms. We have no evidence that he recognized 
Peter and John as the disciples of Christ, and expected that they 
would heal his infirmity. ‘Their address to him in the next verse 
precludes that supposition. : 

V.6. év r@ dvduari, k. T. r., 1. e. We speaking in his name, by 
virtue of his authority; comp. 16,18. The language of Christ, on 
the contrary, when he performed a miracle, was, col \éye, or to that 
effect ; see Luke 5, 24. — rod Nafwpaiov is added for the sake of 
distinction, as in 2, 22.—epurares is imperative present, and not 


CHAP. Ill. 6-11.] NOTES. 59 


aorist, like ¢yecpa:, because it denotes a continued act; comp. 8, 26; 
13,8, etc. W. § 44.5. b.; 8. § 141. 5. 

V. 7. adrov. A genitive which belongs to two or more nouns 
usually precedes them. W. § 30. 3. 4.—adces, feet; odupd, 
ankles. ‘This particularity has been reckoned among the traces of 
a professional habit, for which Luke is distinguished. 

V. 8. é&adddpevos, leaping up (De Wet.), lit. forth from the 
place where he sat, not from his bed (Mey.), since kaOnpevos, v. 10, 
shows that he was not reclining. — es 70 iepév, i. e. into the part of 
the temple where the Jews worshipped. See the remarks on v. 2. 

V.10. éneyivwokov .... dre obros, they recognized him that this 
one, etc. The subject of the subordinate clause is attracted here 
into the principal clause, and then repeated in odros. So in 4, 13; 
9, 20; 13, 32; 16,38, etc. The subject of the second clause be- 
comes in this way more prominent. W. § 63.4; B. § 151. I. 6,7. 
The ordinary construction would omit avroy after émeyiveokoy, and 
make the sentence after ér the object of the verb. — mpés rip éXe- 
npuoovyny, for the alms which he solicited. 


V. 11-26. The Testimony of Peter after the Miracle. 


V. 11. xparotvros avrod, as he held them fast, or kept near to them. 
This latter signification, says De Wette, has not been fully proved, 
but arises naturally out of the other. Meyer adheres more correctly 
to the first meaning: the man in the ardor of his gratitude clung to 
his benefactors, and would not be separated from them.  avrod is 
considered the correct reading, instead of rod tadévros ywdod in the 
‘common text (Grsb., Mey., Lachm.). The addition is transferred to 
the English version. — orod .... Zodouavos. See John 10, 23. 
This hall or porch was on the eastern side of the temple, in the 
court of the heathen. The general opinion is that it was called the 
porch of Solomon, because it occupied the site of a porch which 
had been connected with the first temple. Lucke* thinks that it 
may have been a structure built by Solomon himself, which had 
escaped the destruction of the first temple. Tholuck expresses 
the same belief. It accords with this view that Josephus (Antt. 20. 
9.7) calls the porch épyov Zadopudvros. In popular speech, says 
Lightfoot, the Jews sometimes meant the entire court of the Gen- 
tiles when they spoke of Solomon’s porch. — &@aySo: agrees with 
Aads as a collective term; comp. 5, 16. 





* Commentar iber das Evangelium des Johannes, Vol. If. p. 361. 


60 NOTES. [CHAP. III. 12-15, 


V. 12. dmexpivaro, x. r.d., proceeded to speak (Hebraistic, 5, 8) 
to the people, or perhaps answered (De Wet.) with reference to the 
expressions of their wonder, see v. 11.— éml roir@ is not neuter, 
but masculine: at this man (Mey., De Wet.), which prepares the 
way for adrov, and is similar to v. 16.— ui is here emphatic, 
upon us instead of Christ or God, to whom the miracle ought to 
have turned their thoughts. — drevifere takes its object in the da- 
tive ; comp. also 10,4; 14,9; or in the accusative with eis; comp. 
v. 4; 1,10; 6, 15. — memounxdot.... adrov contains an ecbatic in- 
finitive: effected that he should walk, W.% 45.4; S. § 165. 3. 

V. 18. ed0€ace, glorified, honored, not by the miracle at this 
time, but by all the mighty works which attested his mission ; see 2, 
22. — maida means, not son = vids, but servant = 12, which was 
one of the prophetic appellations of the Messiah, especially i in the 
second part of Isaiah. See Matt. 12, 18, as compared with Is. 42, 
1 sq. The term occurs again in this sense, v. 26; 4, 27. 30. — 
pevasin 1,1. The antithetic idea may have been that in v. 17. 
— mapedaxare, ye delivered up, viz. to Pilate. — npyvjcacbe, denied, 
refused to acknowledge as Messiah. — avrov. It will be seen that 
the writer drops here the relative structure of the sentence. — 
Kpivavros .... amodvew, when, or although he decided, viz. that it 
was just to release: him; see Luke 23,16; John 19,4.  ékeivov 
refers here to the nearer noun, and performs the proper office of 
rovrov. W.§ 23. 1. It is not uncommon for Greek writers to in- 
terchange these pronouns. 

V. 14. 68¢, but, contrasts their conduct with that of Pilate. — rév 
dyov is a Messianic title, as in Luke 4, 34. tov Sikaov, the Just 
one. ‘The epithets mark the contrast between his character and 
that of Barabbas. — dvdpa dovéa, i. €. not merely a man, but a 
man who was a murderer ; see Matt. 27, 16 sq.; Mark 15,7 sq. 

V. 15. dv d€ dpynydv tis faqs, but the author of life, i. e. as 
De Wette remarks, of life in the fullest sense in which the Scrip- 
tures ascribe that property to the Saviour, viz. spiritual or Christian 
life (comp. John 1,4; Heb. 2, !0), and also natural or physical 
life, John 5, 26; 11,25. Olshausen and Meyer suppose the main 
idea to be that of spiritual life ; but the evident relation of Cajs to 
davexreivare Shows that the other idea is not certainly to be excluded : 
he who gives life to all had his own life taken from him. — od 


. eopev, of whom (13, 31) or of which we are witnesses ; see on 
2, 32. 


CHAP. III. 16— 18.] NOTES. 61 


V. 16. én rH miores, x. r. A.. upon, on account of, the faith 
(entertained by us) im his name. émi represents their faith as the 
ground or condition on which the restoration had taken place; not 
for (Olsh.), i. e. in order to produce faith in the lame man and 
others. — dvéyaros is the genitive of the object, and the expression is 
like wiotis beod, Mark 11,22 ; aioris "Incod, Rom. 3,22. W.§ 30.1. 
—iv....oidare, whom you see entirely restored now to bodily 
vigor, and know as a person who was formerly infirm, helpless. — 
TO dvoua, k.T.d., his name has made strong, i. e. he invoked by an 
appeal to him as that which his name represents (see on 2, 21). 
The reason for expressing the idea in this manner is evident from 
v. 6.— 7 miotis 4} Sv adrod, the faith that is wrought in us through 
him (De Wet., Mey., Win.). The apostles here, it will be ob- 
served, ascribe the origin, as well as the efficacy, of their faith to 
Christ. Compare 1 Pet. 1,21. This second clause of the verse 
repeats essentially the idea of the first, in order to affirm more 
emphatically that it was not their own power, but the power of 
Christ, which had performed the miracle. — drévavrt wavrav indy, in 
the presence of you all; and hence they must acknowledge that no 
other means had been used to effect the miracle. 

V. 17. Having set before them their aggravated guilt, the apos- 
tle would now suggest to them the hope of mercy. — dr... . émpa- 
are, that ye acted in ignorance, i. e. of the full criminality of their 
conduct. They had sinned, but their sin was not of so deep a dye 
that it could not have been still more heinous. The language of 
Peter concedes to them such a palliation of the deed as consisted, 
‘at the time of their committing it, in the absence of a distinct con- 
viction that he whom they crucified was the Lord of life and glory 
(see 13, 27) ; but it does not exonerate them from the guilt of having 
resisted the evidence that this was his character, which had been 
furnished by his miracles, his life, doctrine, and resurrection. The 
Saviour himself, in his dying prayer, urged the same extenuation in 
behalf of his murderers: “ Father, forgive them; for they know 
not what they do.” Compare also the language of Paul in 1 Tim. 
1, 13 : “ Who was before a blasphemer, and a persecutor, and injuri- 
ous ; but I obtained mercy because I did it ignorantly in unbelief.” 
—dorep xai of dpxovres tyav, as also your rulers, who were not 
present, and hence are distinguished from those addressed. 

V. 18. d€, but, i.e. while they did this they accomplished a 
divine purpose. — andvray téy mpopyrdv, instead of being taken 


62 NOTES. [CHAP. III. 18, 19. 


strictly, may be viewed as a phrase: the prophets as a whole. For 
this restricted use of as in such general expressions, see Matt. 3, 
5; Mark 1,37; John 3, 26. Most of the books of the Old Testa- 
ment foretell distinctly the sufferings and death of the Messiah. 
Compare Luke 24, 27. Olshausen regards the entire history of the 
Jews as typical, and in that view maintains that all the ancient 
prophets prophesied of Christ. — maOciv rov Xpiordv, that Christ 
would, or must, suffer (De Wet.). After verbs which signify to de- 
clare, believe, and the like, the infinitive has often the latter sense. 
W. § 45. 2. b.— ovr refers to the previous verse: thus, in this 
way, viz. by their agency; comp. 13, 27. It is incorrect to un- 
derstand it of the accordance between the fulfilment and the pre- 
diction. 

V. 19. peravoncare odv, repent therefore, since your guilt is not 
such as to exclude you: from the mercy procured by the Saviour 
whom you have crucified. — éemorpépare, turn, i. e. from your 
present course or character unto Christ, 9, 85; 11, 215 or unto 
God, 14, 15; 15,19. What is required here includes faith as a 
constituent part of the act to be performed. —eis.... dpaprias, 
that your sins may be blotted out, obliterated as it were from the 
book or tablet where they are recorded ; comp. Col. 2, 14; Is. 43, 
25. — éras dv, x. r. A., not when (Eng. vers., see W. § 43. 6), but 
telic, that the times of refreshing may come, i. e. to you personally, 
that you may have part in the blessings of the Messiah’s kingdom, 
for which you can be prepared only by repentance and the pardon 
of your sins. dy after this particle followed by the conjunctive 
represents the act of the verb as dependent, i. e. in this case, on 
their compliance with the exhortation. W. § 43.6. It is not en- 
tirely certain whether xatpol dvayigews refers to the present consola- 
tions of the gospel, or to the blessedness which awaits the followers 
of Christ at the end of the world, when he shall return and receive 
them to himself in heaven. The expression, in itself considered, 
would very aptly describe the peace of mind and joy which result 
from a consciousness of pardon and reconciliation to God. So one 
class of commentators understand it. Others think that the time 
here meant must coincide with that in the next verse ; and hence 
suppose the apostle to have in view Christ’s second coming, when 
those who have believed on him shall enter upon their eternal rest 
in heaven. Compare Heb. 4,9-11. This is the interpretation of 
Chrysostom, Olshausen, De Wette, Meyer, and others. The order 


CHAP. III. 19, 20. NOTES. 63 


of the clauses does not decide against the second opinion, since 
it may be as natural in this instance to think first of the effect, and 
then to assign the cause or occasion, as the reverse. It is in favor 
of this opinion that it refers Z\dwor and dmocreiAy to the same period 
or event, as the close succession of the verbs would lead us to ex- 
pect. — dxé mpocézmov is not a periphrasis for the preposition, but ac- 
cording to a Hebrew idiom represents the presence of the Lord as 
the source of the joy of his people. — xupiov, which may refer to 
Christ or God (see on 1, 24), applies to the latter here, since it pre- 
pares the way for the subject of the next verb. 

V. 20. Kal drooreitn, x. r.., and may send forth, viz. from 
heaven, see v. 21; comp. deifex 6 paxdpios Kat pdvos duvdorns, 
x. 7.2.5 in 1 Tim. 6, 15.— mpoxeyeipiopévoy ipiv, before appointed 
for you, i. e. from eternity, see 1 Pet. 1, 20. mpoxexnpvypévor, 
announced before, is a less approved reading. Nearly all critics 
understand this passage as referring to the return of Christ at 
the end of the world. The similarity of the language to that of 
other passages which announce that event demands this interpreta- 
tion. The apostle enforces his exhortation to repent by an appeal 
to the final coming of Christ, not because he would represent it as 

near in point of time, but because that event was always near to the 
feelings and consciousness of the first believers. It was the great 
consummation on which the strongest desires of their souls were 
fixed, to which their thoughts and hopes were habitually turned. 
They lived in expectation of it; they labored to be prepared for it ; 
they were constantly, in the expressive language of Peter, looking 
for and hastening unto it. It is then that Christ will reveal himself 
in glory, will come “to take vengeance on them that obey not the 
gospel, and to be admired in all them who believe,” will raise the 
dead, invest the redeemed with an incorruptible body, and introduce 
them for the first time, and for ever, into the state of perfect holl- 
ness and happiness prepared for them in his kingdom. ‘The apos- 
tles, the first Christians in general, comprehended the grandeur of 
that occasion ; it filled their circle of view, stood forth to their con- 
templations as the point of culminating interest in their own and 
the world’s history, threw into comparative insignificance the pres- 
ent time, death, all intermediate events, and made them feel that 
the manifestation of Christ, with its consequences of indescribable 
moment to all true believers, was the grand object which they were 
to keep in view as the end of their toils, the commencement and 





64 _ ‘NOTES. [cHAP. III. 20, 21. 


perfection of their glorious immortality. In such a state of inti- 
mate sympathy with an event so habitually present to their thoughts, 
they derived, they must have derived, their chief incentives to action 
from the prospect of that future glory ; they hold it up to the people 
of God to encourage them in affliction, to awaken them to fidelity, 
zeal, and perseverance, and appeal to it to warn the wicked, and 
impress upon them the necessity of preparation for the revelations 
of that day; for examples of this, comp. 17, 30. 31; 1 Tim. 6, 
13 sq.; 2 Tim. 4, 8; Tit. 2, 11 sq.; 2 Pet. 3, 11 sq., etc. Some 
have ascribed the frequency of such passages in the New Testament 
to a definite expectation on the part of the apostles that the per- 
sonal advent of Christ was nigh at hand; but such a view is not 
only unnecessary, in order to account for such references to the day 
of the Lord, but at variance with 2 Thess. 2,2. The apostle Paul 
declares there, that the expectation in question was unfounded, and 
that he himself did not entertain it or teach it to others. But while 
he corrects the opinion of those at Thessalonica who imagined that 
the return of Christ was then near, neither he nor any other inspired 
writer has informed us how remote that event may be, or when it 
will take place. That is a point which has not been revealed to 
men ; the New Testament has left it in a state of uncertainty. 
‘The day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night”; and 
men are exhorted to be always prepared for it. It is to be acknowl- 
edged that most Christians, at the present day, do not give that 
prominence to the resurrection and the judgment, in their thoughts 
or discourse, which the New Testament writers assign to them ; 
but this fact is owing, not necessarily to a difference of opinion in 
regard to the time when Christ will come, but to our inadequate 
views and impressions concerning the grandeur of that occasion, and 
the too prevalent worldliness in the church, which is the cause or 
consequence of such deficient views. If modern Christians sym- 
pathized more fully with the sacred writers on this subject, it would 
bring both their conduct and their style of religious instruction into 
nearer correspondence with the lives and teaching of the primitive 
examples of our faith. 

V.21. ov.... déacba, whom it is necessary (not was neces- 
sary == Se) that the heavens should receive ; in other words, the 
divine plan requires that this which has taken place should occur, 
viz. the ascension of Christ. De Wette takes the infinitive aorist 
as future, and justifies it by the remark that the ascension may be 


CHAP. III. 21—23.] NOTES. 65 


viewed as still incomplete, because it was so recent. Some render 
dééacOa, to retain, and thus avoid the peculiarity of the expression. 
The use of the word does not allow it. — yey has no responding 6¢ ; 
also in y. 22. Many of the Jews believed that when the Messiah 
appeared, he would remain permanently on earth, see John 12, 34. 
Peter corrects here that misapprehension: the Saviour must return 
to heaven and reign there for a season, before his final manifesta- 
tion. —dyp..... mdvrav, until (during is incorrect) the times of 
the restoration of all things, i. e. to a state of primeval order, 
purity, and happiness, such as will exist for those who have part 
in the kingdom of Christ, at his second coming. ‘The expression 
designates the same epoch as katpoi dvayiéews (Olsh., Mey., De 
Wet.). — dr (attracted for ots, sc. xpdvous, or mept Sv) edddynoer, which 
he spake of, announced, comp. v. 24.—dz’ aidvos, i. e. from the 
earliest times of prophetic revelation. Such a period of restora- 
tion to holiness and happiness is the explicit or implied theme of 
prophecy from the beginning to the end of the Old Testament. . 
Some omit the expression, or put it in brackets, but the evidence 
for it preponderates. 

V. 22. eimev, viz. in Deut. 18, 18 sq. The translation is partly 
that of the Seventy, partly new. Stephen cites this passage to the 
same effect, in 7,37. ‘Their mode of applying it shows that the 
Jews were agreed in referring it to the Messiah. That may be 
argued also from John 4, 25; see Hengstenberg’s remarks in his 
Christol. Vol. I. p. 67 sq. — dvaorjoes = D’p?, will raise up, cause 
to appear. — as éyé, like me. The context of the original passage 
(comp. v. 15, 16 with v. 17, 18) indicates that the resemblance be- 
tween them was to consist chiefly in their office as mediator. .The- 
meaning is: Since the Israelites had been unable to endure the 
terrors of the divine majesty, God would, at some future time, send 
to them another mediator, through whom he would communicate 
with them, as he had done through Moses (Heng.). See also Gal. 
3, 19; Heb. 9, 15. — dca dy, whatsoever, see 2, 21. 

V, 23. Peter interrupts the sentence here to insert gora: 8¢, which 
is not in the Hebrew. It serves to call attention more strongly to 
what follows. — efohoOpevOjoerar ex rod daod, shall be utterly de- 
stroyed from the people. ‘This expression occurs often in the Pen- 
tateuch, where it denotes the sentence or punishment of death. 
The apostle uses it here evidently to denote the punishment which 


corresponds to that, in relation to the soul, i.e, as De Wette ex- 
9 


66 NOTES. [ CHAP. III. 23 — 26. 


plains it, exclusion from the kingdom of God. Peter has substi- 
tuted this expression here for 12 WIS = exduxnow e& adrod, as 
_rendered in the Septuagint. J will exact vengeance from him. 
The only difference is this: the Hebrew affirms the purpose of 
God to punish, the Greek employed by Peter defines at the same 
time the nature or mode of the punishment. 

V. 24. mdvres.... r&v xabe&js stands concisely for all the proph- 
ets from Samuel, both he and they who followed. 'The appositional 
clause is here merged in the genitive. dd Sapound shapes the con- 
struction, instead of the remoter mpofjra. Compare Luke 24, 27. 
W. § 65.8. From Samuel on, and those who followed, is the literal 
translation, which involves a tautology, the second clause being com- 
prehended in the first. Samuel is mentioned next after Moses, be- 
cause so few prophets appeared in the interval between them, or so 
few whose names are recorded. ‘They stand in the same proximity 
to each other in Ps. 99, 6.— dco. éddAnoay, x. 7... as many as 
spake, i. e. prophesied, also announced these days. 

V. 25. of viot.... ris diabnens, Ye are the sons of the prophets, 
i. e. those to whom their predictions respecting the Messiah specially 
belong ; and of the covenant, those to whom God would first offer 
the mercies which he covenanted to bestow on Abraham’s spir- 
itual seed, i.e. those who believe, and thus “‘ walk in the steps of 
his faith®?; see Rom. 4, 12. vioi denotes here, after a common 
Hebraism, participation, appurtenance ; see Rob. Lex. s. v. Its 
ordinary sense, sons, descendants, would be incongruous with 
SuaOnxns. — éyov, kK. T. A., VIZ. In Gen. 12, 3. God repeated the 
promise to Abraham and the other patriarchs, at various times ; see 
Gen. 18, 18; 22, 18; 26, 4, etc.—év 16 omépparr. The seed in 
that passage, therefore, is Christ, as Paul also affirms, Gal. 3, 16; 
i. e. Christ, and the christian race or those who are one with him. 

V. 26. ipiv, unto you (13, 26), or for you, dat. comm. (Mey.), 
depends on dmréorethev. — pdrov, first in the order of time, comp. 
13, 46; Luke 24, 47; Rom. 1, 16. Here, too, Peter recognizes 
the fact that the gospel was to be preached to the heathen; see on 
2, 39. — dvaorjoas has the same sense as in v. 22. — raida, servant, 
v. 13.— The English version follows the common text, which inserts 
Inoovy after airod, but contrary to the best authorities. — edAoyodvra 
applies the idea of the preceding évevAoynOjoovra to the Jews, and 
requires duds to be read with emphasis. — ev 76 droorpéepe, k. 7. X., 
states how he blesses them: tm that he turns away each one from 


CHAP. III. 26—I1V. 2.] NOTES. 67 


your sins, to wit, by his gospel, which secures the pardon and 
sanctification of those who accept it. This verb has elsewhere an 
active sense in the New Testament. Some (Kuin., De Wet.) dis- 
regard that usage and render, in that each one turns away, etc. 
This is opposed also to evAcyodvra, which represents Christ here as 
the actor, men rather as recipients. 





CHAPTER IV. 


V. 1-4. The Imprisonment of Peter and John. 


V. 1. éxéornoay implies commonly a hostile purpose, see 6, 12 ; 
17,5; Luke 20, 1. — of iepeis, the priests who officiated in the 
temple at the time, or some of their number. The priests were 
divided into twenty-four classes, each of which had charge of the 
temple service for a week at a time (1 Chron. 24, 3 sq. ; 2 Chron. 
8, 14; also Jos. Antt. 7. 14.7). The particular duties from day 
to day were assigned to individuals by lot; see Luke 1,9. During 
the festival weeks the number of priests was increased, as the 
labors to be performed were greater. Win. Realw. Vol. Il. p. 273. 
It is possible that the feast of Pentecost (2, 1) had not yet termi- 
nated. — 6 otparnyos rod iepod was an officer having a body of Le- 
vites under his command, who preserved order about the temple, 
and in that respect performed a sort of military service. See 
Jahn’s Archeol. § 365. In 5, 26, they are called his dmnpera. 
Josephus speaks repeatedly of this guard (e. g. Bell. Jud. 6. 5. 3), 
whose commander he designates in the same manner. In 2 Macc. 
3, 4, he is termed 6 spoordrns rot iepod. We read of orparnyovs rod 
iepod in Luke 22, 52, which is best explained by supposing that the 
temple guard was divided into several companies, each of which had 
its otparnyos, though this title belonged distinctively to the chief in 
command. — of 3a8dovxaio. It was probably at their instigation that 
the apostles were apprehended. ‘The Sadducees are mentioned in 
this generic manner, because those who acted in this instance repre- 
sented the spirit of the entire sect. Compare Matt. 9,11; 12, 14; 
Mark 8, 11; John 8, 3. 

V. 2. diarovotpevor, being indignant. Some (Mey., De Wet.) 
restrict this participle to the nearest noun, since the motive assigned 


68 NOTES. [CHAP. IV. 2-5. 


for the interference in xarayyédAew, x. t.., applies only to the Sad- 
ducees, who denied the doctrine of a resurrection; see 23, 8; 
Matt. 22,23. But we may regard &:a 76 diddoKew avrovs Tov Nady as 
more comprehensive than karayyéA\ew, x. tr. d., Instead of being 
merely defined by it; the priests would be indignant that their office 
as teachers should be assumed by men like Peter and John (see 
Matt. 21, 23), and especially that the Jesus whom they themselves 
had crucified should be proclaimed as the Messiah (see 5, 28).— 
kutayyéedrew ev TO "Inood, announced in Jesus, i. e. in his example, in 
the fact of his resurrection ; comp. év jpyiv, 1 Cor. 4,6. This is the 
most approved interpretation (Bng., Kuin., De Wet., Mey.). Some 
render the resurrection in virtue of Jesus, by his power; see 1 
Cor. 15, 22. Our English version may convey that idea of the 
meaning. But it was not so much the general resurrection as that 
of Christ himself which the apostles proclaimed at this stage of 
their ministry ; see 1, 22; 2,24; 3, 15, etc. The single concrete 
instance, however, as the Sadducees argued, involved the general 
truth, and, if substantiated, refuted their creed. 

V. 3. eis rpnow,into prison. In usage this word denotes a place 
of custody (see 5, 18), rather than the act; the latter is the proper 
force of such a termination; K. § 233. b. a.—eis ri avpiov, 
until (see Matt. 10, 22; Gal. 3,23; 1 Thess. 4, 15) the morrow. 
— i yap, x. t.r., for it was already evening, and hence no judi- 
cial examination could take place until the next day. It was three 
o’clock when the apostles went to the temple ; comp. 3, 1. 

V. 4. rov Adyov, the word, the well-known message of Christ. — 
éyermOn = éyevero, peculiar to the later Greek (W.§ 15; Lob. ad 
Phryn., p. 108): decame, i. e. in consequence of the present addi- 
tion. — 6 dpiuds tav dvdpav, the number of the men who had em- 
braced the gospel up to this time (Kuin., Mey., De Wet.) ; see 1, 
15; 2,41. A retrospective remark like this was entirely natural, 
after having spoken of the many who believed at this time. Some 
suppose the new converts alone to have amounted to five thousand ; 
but that is less probable, as the apostles could hardly have addressed 
so great a multitude in such a place. dydpav comprehends probably 
both sexes, like yuyai, 2, 41; comp. Luke 11, 31. 


V.5-7. Their Arraignment before the Sanhedrim. 


V.5.  atrév refers to the Jews implied in vy. 4 (De Wet.). W. 
§ 22.3. Meyer understands it of the believers mentioned in that 


CHAP. IV. 5, 6.] NOTES. 69 


verse, as if their conduct was contrasted with that of their rulers ; 
Stier * explains it of the apostles. — rots dpxovras, k. T. X. The 
Sanhedrim is here described by an enumeration of the three orders 
which composed that body, viz. the chief priests, who are men- 
tioned last in this instance, the elders or heads of families, and the 
scribes or teachers of the law; comp. 5, 21; Matt. 2,4; 26, 59. 
dpxovras designates the Sanhedrists in general, since they were all 
rulers, while cai annexes the respective classes to which they be- 
longed: and (more definitely, comp. 1, 14) the elders, etc. It was 
unnecessary to repeat the article, because the nouns have the same 
gender, W. § 18.4; 8. § 89. 9.— cis ‘Iepoveadnp, unto Jerusalem, 
as many of them may have lived out of the city (Mey., De Wet.). 
Some (Kuin.) consider eis as used loosely for év. 

V.6. “Avvay tov apxtepéa. The actual high-priest at this time 
was Caiaphas, see John 11, 49; but Annas, his father-in-law, had 
held the same office, and, according to the Jewish custom in such 
cases, retained still the same title. He is mentioned first, perhaps, 
out of respect’ to his age, or because his talents and activity con- 
ferred upon him a personal superiority. — Iwavyny kai ’Adéfavdpor. 
Nothing certain is known of them beyond the intimation here that 
they were priests, and active at this time in public affairs. Alea- 
ander is another instance of a foreign name in use among the Jews, 
see 1,23. It is improbable that he was the Alexander mentioned 
in Jos. Antt. 18. 8. 1, who was a brother of Philo, and alabarch of 
the Jews at Alexandria. In that case he was now transiently at 
Jerusalem, or else must have soon changed his residence. — kat 
dco .... dpxtepatixod, and as many as were of the pontifical family, 
i.e. nearly related to the dpxvepeis, viz. the high-priest at the time, 
his predecessors in office, and the heads of the twenty-four sacer- 
dotal classes (see on v. 1), which last are supposed to have had a 
seat in the Sanhedrim (see Win. Realw. Vol. Il. p. 271). The at- 
tendance of so many persons of rank evinced the excited state of 
the public mind, and gave importance to the decisions of the coun- 
cil. This is Meyer’s view of the meaning. It appears to me more 
simple to understand, that John and Alexander were relatedto An- 
nas and Caiaphas, and that dco, «. r. A., were the other influential 





* Die Reden der Apostel nach Ordnung und Zusammenhang ausgelesgt, 
von Rudolf Stier, in two volumes. When this author’s name is cited, it 
is with reference to this work. 


70 NOTES. [cHAP. Iv. 6-9. 


members of the same family. That the family of Annas was one of 
great distinction appears in the fact that five of his sons attained 
the office of high-priest. Some render yevous, order, class, and re- 
gard dpyepatixod == ray dpxvepewy: as many as were of the class of 
the chief priests. 'This sense renders the description of the differ- 
ent branches of the Sanhedrim more complete, but assigns a forced 
meaning to yévous. | 

V.'7. adrovs, them, viz. the apostles last mentioned in v. 3. — 
ev peo, in the midst, before them so as to be within the view of all ; 
comp. John 8, 3. The Jewish Sanhedrin, it is said, sat in a semi- 
circle or a circle; but the expression here affords no proof of that 
custom. —éy moig Suvdyer, by what power, efficacy; not by what 
right or authority = efovcia, see Matt. 21, 23. — i ev moiw dvdpuare, 
or (in other words) in virtue of what uttered name. This appears 
to be a more specific form of the same inquiry. — rodro, this, viz. 
the cure of the lame man. Olshausen understands it of their 
teaching, which is not only less appropriate to the accompanying 
words, but renders the answer of the apostles in v. 9, 10 irrele- 
vant. 


V. 8-12. Testimony of Peter before the Council. 


V. 8. adrnodeis mvetpatos dyiov, filled with the Holy Spirit, i. e. 
anew, see v. 31; 2,4. He was thus elevated above all human 
fear, and assisted at the same time to make such a defence of the 
truth as the occasion required. ‘The Saviour had authorized the 
disciples to expect such aid under circumstances like the present ; 
see Mark 13, 11; Luke 21, 14.15. For the absence of the article, 
see on l, 2. 

V.9. «i, if, as is the fact, hence virtually = since. e¢? in the 
protasis with the indicative affirms the condition. K. § 339.1. a; 
W. § 42. 4. The apodosis begins at yraorov éorw. — émi evepyecia, 
K. T. Ae, in respect to a good deed, benefit conferred. on an infirm 
man (Str., Mey.) ; comp. John 10, 32. — dvépamov is the objective 
genitive; comp. 3, 16; 21, 20; Luke 6, 7. S. § 99. 1l.c; K. 
§ 265. 2. b. — ev rin, whereby, how (De Wet., Mey.), not by whom 
(Kuin.). The first sense agrees best with the form of the question 
in v. 7. — odros, this one. The man who had been healed was 
present, see v. 10, 14. He may have come as a spectator, or, as 
De Wette thinks, may have been summoned as a witness. Nean- 
der conjectures that he too may have been taken into custody at the 


CHAP. IV. 9— 12.] NOTES. 71 


same time with the apostles.— cécwora, has been made whole. 
The subject of discourse determines the meaning of the verb. 

V. 10. ev 16 dvdparr, by his name, the invocation of it. The 
question how (v. 9) is here answered. — rod Na¢wpaiov identifies the 
individual whom the apostle affirms to be Jesus Messiah ; see on 
2, 22. — dv .... ék vexpov is an adversative clause, but omits the 
ordinary disjunctive. For this asyndetic construction, see W. 
§ 66. iv.; K. § 325. It promotes compression, vivacity of style. — 
év tovr@ may be neuter, sc. édvoudrs (Mey.); or masculine, in this 
one (Kuin., De Wet.), which is more natural, since év is a nearer 
antecedent, and odros follows in the next verse. 

V. 11. oéros, viz. Christ, who is the principal subject, though 
a nearer noun intervenes; see 7,19. W.§ 23. 1; 8. § 123. N. 1. 
Compare the Note on 3, 13. For the passage referred to, see 
Ps. 118, 22. The words, as Tholuck * remarks, appear to have 
been used as a proverb, and hence are susceptible of various ap- 
plications. ‘The sense for this place may be thus given: The Jew- 
ish rulers, according to the proper idea of their office, were the 
builders of God’s spiritual house; and as such should have been 
the first to acknowledge the Messiah, and exert themselves for the 
establishment and extension of his kingdom. That which they had 
not done, God had now accomplished, in spite of their neglect and 
opposition. He had raised up Jesus from the dead, and thus con- 
firmed his claim to the Messiahship; he had shown him to be the 
true author of salvation to men, the corner-stone, the only sure 
foundation on which they can rest their hopes of eternal life. Com- 
pare Matt. 21, 42; Luke 20, 17.— The later editors consider 
_ oixodépov more correct than oixodopovvrav. — 6 yevduevos . ... yavias, 
like the clause which precedes, forms the predicate subject after 
éotiv. Kecbadiy yevias is the same as Aidos dxpoywrnaios, in 1 Pet. 2, 
6; comp. Is. 28, 16. It refers, probably, not to the copestone, 
but to that which lies at the foundation of the edifice, in the 
angle where two of the walls come together, and which gives to 
the edifice its strength and support. See Gesen. Heb. Lex. s. 
wiser. 4. 

V. 12. 4 cwrnpia, the salvation which the gospel brings, or 
which men need; comp. John 4, 22 (Bng., Olsh., De Wet., Mey.). 
W.§ 17.1. The contents of the next clause render it impossible 





* Uebersetzung und Auslegung der Psalmen, p. 496. 


72 NOTES. [CHAP. Iv. 12-15. 


to understand the term of the cure of the lame man. -It was not 
true that the apostles proclaimed the name of Christ as the one on 
which men should call in order to be healed: of their diseases. — 
ovre yap,x. t. A. It has just been said, that Christ is the only Sav- 
iour. It is asserted here that he is such beeause no other has been 
provided. —ré Sedopevov, which is given. — év dvOporos is not = 
dat. comm., for men, but known among them; see W. § 31.6. 
The former is a resulting idea, but not the expressed one, — ev 6 
.... Hpas, by which we, i. e. all of us, men (Bng.), must be saved. 
dei = not %éeorr, may, but it is necessary, since God has appointed 
no other way of salvation. The apostle would exclude the idea of 
any other mode of escape if this be neglected. 


V. 13-18. Decision of the Sanhedrim. 


V. 13. xararaBésuevor, having perceived, from intimations at the 
time, e. g. their demeanor, language, pronunciation (Str.), comp. 
Matt. 26, '73; or having ascertained by previous inquiry (Mey.). 
The tense, it will be observed, differs from that of the other parti- 
ciple. — dypdpparot kai iSidrat, illiterate, i. e. untaught in the learn- 
ing of the Jewish schools, see John 7,15; and obscure, plebeian 
(Kuin., Olsh., De Wet.). It is unnecessary to regard the terms as 
synonymous (Mey., Rob.) Their self-possession and intelligence 
astonished the rulers, being so much superior to their education and 
rank in life.— émeyivwoxov .... hoav, and they recognized them 
that they were (formerly, not had been) with Jesus. ‘Their wonder, 
says Meyer, assisted their recollection, so that, as they observed the 
prisoners more closely, they remembered them as persons whom 
they had known before. Many of the rulers had often been pres- 
ent when Christ taught publicly (see Matt. 21,23; Luke 18, 18; 
John 12, 42, etc.), and must have seen Peter and John. That the 
latter was known to the high-priest is expressly said in John 
18, 15. 3 

V. 14. ody adrois, with them, viz. the apostles, not the rulers ; 
comp. adrovs just before. — éordra, standing, no longer a cripple. 
— dvreineiv, to object, against the reality of the miracle, or the truth 
of Peter’s declaration. 

V. 15. adrobs.... dmedbeiv. The deliberations of the assem- 
bly were open to others, though the apostles were excluded; and 
hence it was easy for Luke to ascertain what was said and done 
during their absence. Some of the many priests who afterwards 


CHAP. IV. 15 — 20.] NOTES. 73 


believed (see 6,7) may have belonged to the council at this time, 
or, at all events, may have been present as spectators. It is not 
improbable that Saul of Tarsus was there, or even some of the 
christian party who were not known in that character. 

V. 16. yoordv, notorious, indubitable.— davepdy agrees with 
ért....avra@v, and is the predicate nominative after eori under- 
stood. — ov Suvdpeba, x. tr. dX. See 3, 9. 11. They would have 
suppressed the evidence had it been possible. 

V.17. ta.... Scaveundy, that it may not spread, sc. rd onpeiov, 
with which the people would associate inevitably the doctrine which 
the miracle confirmed. The subject of the verb involves the idea 
of ddux7, but it would be arbitrary to supply that word as the direct 
nominative. Some have supposed the last clause in the verse to 
require it. — dey .... avrois, let us (lit. with a threat) severely 
threaten them. Winer (§ 58.3) regards this combination of a verb 
and noun as an expedient for expressing the infinitive absolute with 
a finite verb in Hebrew. See Gesen. Heb. Gr. § 128. 3. But we 
meet with the idiom in ordinary Greek ; see Thiersch de Pent. 
Vers. p. 169. The frequency of the construction in the New Tes- 
tament is undoubtedly Hebraistic. — émi r@ dvduare rovre, upon this 

name as the basis of their doctrine or authority ; comp. v. 18; 
5, 28.40. W.§ 52.¢. 

V.18. +16 before P6éyyeoOa points that out more distinctly as 
the object of the prohibition. It is not a mere sign of the substan- 
tive construction. W. § 45. 2.— d.ddoxew, x. 7. d., specifies the 
part of their preaching which the rulers were most anxious to sup- 
press. ‘The other infinitive does not render this superfluous. 


V. 19-22. The Answer of Peter and John. 


V.19. evamov rod deod, in the sight of God (Hebraistic), whose 
judgment is true, and which men are bound to follow as the rule of 
their conduct. — dkovew, to obey, see Luke 10,16; 16, 31; John 
8, 47.— paddov, not more, but rather, 5,29. The question was, 
whether they should obey men at all in opposition to God, not more 
or less. See further on 5, 29. 

V. 20. © od Suvdpeba yap, x.r.X., confirms the answer supposed to 
be given to their appeal. We must obey God ; for we cannot (moral- 
ly, i. e. in accordance with truth and duty) not speak, i. e. conceal, 
suppress. The negatives belong to different verbs, and reverse the 
idea. W.§ 59.9; 8. § 184.4; K. § 318. R. 8. 

10 


74 NOTES. [CHAP. IV. 21-25. 


V.21. mpocaredAnodpevor adrovs, having threatened them further, 
i. e, than they had done already, see v. 18. — pndev cipicxovres, 
finding nothing, no means, opportunity. — 7d més, namely, how, on 
what pretence ; comp. 22, 30; Luke 1, 62; 9, 46, etc. This use 
of the article before single clauses distinguishes Luke and Paul 
from the other writers of the New Testament. It serves to awaken 
attention to the proposition introduced by it. See W. § 20. 3. — 
dua rv Nady belongs to the participle (Mey.), rather than dédvoap. 
The intervening clause breaks off the words from the latter connec- 
tion. The idea, too, is not, they were able to invent no charge 
against the apostles, but none which they felt it safe to adopt, be- 
cause the people were so well disposed towards the Christians. 

V. 22. ydp. The cure wrought was the greater the longer the 
time during which the infirmity had existed.—éréy depends on 
jv as a genitive of property. K. § 273. 2.¢.; C. § 387. —vec- 
gapdkovra, sc. érav, than forty years, governed by mAcdvev as a 
comparative ; comp. 25, 6. De Wette assumes an ellipsis of #, 
which puts the numeral in the genitive, because that is the case of 
the preceding noun. But most grammarians (K. § 748. R.1; Mt. 
§ 455. A. 4) represent # as suppressed only after mAeov, mAeto, and 
the like; comp. Matt. 26, 53, as correctly read. — rijs idvews, the 
healing, the act of it which constituted the miracle; genitive of 
apposition. W. § 48. 2. 


V. 23-31. The Apostles return to the Disciples, and unite 
with them in Prayer aud Praise. 


V. 23. pds todvs idiovs, unto their own friends in the faith; 
comp. 24, 23; Tit. 3,14. Nothing in the context requires us to 
limit the term to the apostles. —oj dpyuepets kal of mpeaBirepo. This 
is another mode of designating the Sanhedrim, see v. 5. 

V. 24. 8éomora is applied to God as absolute in power and 
authority. It is one of the titles of Christ also, see 2 Pet. 2,1; 
Jude v. 4.— od 6 beds, sc. e?, thou art the God; or, thou the God, 
nominative of address. The latter, says Meyer, accords best with 
the fervid state of their minds. 

V. 25. 6 dud ordparos, x. 7. d., viz. in Ps. 2, 1.2. By citing this 
passage the disciples express their confidence in the success of the 
cause for which they were persecuted; for it is the object of the 
second Psalm to set forth the ultimate and complete triumph of the 
gospel, notwithstanding the opposition which the wicked may array 


CHAP. IV. 25—28.] NOTES. 75 


against it. The contents of the Psalm, as well as the other quota- 
tions from it in the New Testament (13,33 ; Heb. 1,5; 5,5), con- 
firm its Messianic character. — ivari, why, is abbreviated for wa ri 
yemra. W.§ 25.1; K. § 344. R. 6. The question challenges a 
reason for conduct so wicked and futile. It expresses both aston- 
ishment and reproof. — édpiagay, rage, or, which is nearer to the 
classic sense, show themselves restive, refractory. ‘The aorist may 
be used here to denote a recurrent fact. K.§ 256. 4.b. The 
application to this particular instance does not exhaust the prophecy. 
— haoi, nations, including the Jews, whom yn would exclude. — 
keva, vain, abortive. 

V. 26. smapéornoav, stood near with a hostile design ; which re- 
sults, however, from the connection, not the word itself. — cur7- 
xOncav, assembled ; in Hebrew, sat together, with the involved idea 
in both cases that it was for the purpose of combination and resist- 
ance. — rod Xpiorod avrod, his Christ, his Anointed one, = imwn. 
The act of anointing was performed in connection with the setting 
apart of a prophet, priest, or king to his office, and, according to 
the Hebrew symbology, denoted his receiving the spiritual gifts and 
endowments which he needed for the performance of his duties.* 
Compare the Note on 6, 6. The act accompanied consecration to 
the office assumed, but was not the direct sign of it, as is often loose- 
ly asserted. It is with reference to this import of the symbol that the 
Saviour of men is called 6 Xpiords, i. e. the Anointed, by way of 
eminence, because he possessed the gifts of the Spirit without 
measure, was furnished in a perfect manner for the work which he 
came into the world to execute. See on 1, 2. 

V.27. yap illustrates the significance of the prophecy. It had 
been spoken not without meaning: for in truth, etc. — év rh modes 
ravtyn after dAnOeias, is left out of the common text, but rests on 
good authority. — éml rov dyiov maida cov, against thy consecrated ser- 
vant ; see on 3, 18. — éxpicas, didst anoint, with that rite inaugu- 
rate as king. —xai avis "Iopayd, and nations of Israel, i. e. with 
Israel among them ; or the plural, says Meyer, may refer to the 
different Jewish tribes. The latter is the simpler explanation, if we 
may understand the corresponding Hebrew term in that manner ; 
but see Gesen. Lex. s. v. A few authorities read Aad. 

V. 28. sotjoa, in order to do in reality, though not with that 





* Bahr’s Symbolik des Mosaischen Cultus, Vol. II. p. 171 sq. 


76 NOTES. [cHAP. IV. 28 — 22. 


conscious intention on their part. — 7 yelp denotes the power, 4 Bovdy 
the counsel, purpose, of God. mpowpice adapts itself per zeugma to 
both nouns. ‘The verbal idea required by the former would be, 
executed. 

V. 29. xdtpie, Lord, i. e. God, which is required by 6eds in v. 24, 
and madds gov in v. 30; comp. on 1, 24.— émde.... adrdv, look 
upon their threats, in order to see what grace they needed at such a 
crisis. ‘They pray for courage to enable them to preach the word, 
not for security against danger. — mdons, entire, the utmost, 13, 10 ; 
17, 11, etc. In that sense was does not require the article. W. 
§ 17. 10; K. § 246. 5. | 

V. 30. & 7O.... éxreivew oe, in that thou dost stretch forth 
thy hand, the effect of which as a public recognition of their char- 
acter on the part of God would be to render them fearless; or év 
7@ may signify while, which many prefer. — cat onpeia, x. tr. X., and 
that signs and wonders may be wrought (Kuin., Mey., De Wet.). 
The clause is telic and related to ékxreivew, like e’s tacw. Some 
make it depend on dés, which is too remote, and others repeat év 76 
after cai. — maidds cov, thy servant. 

V. 31. écade’On 6 réros. They would naturally regard such an 
event as a token of the acceptance of their prayer, and as a pledge 
that a power adequate to their protection was engaged for them. — 
exdjoOncav, x. TX. ‘They were thus endued both with courage to 
declare the word of God, and with miraculous power for confirm- 
ing its truth. ‘They had just prayed for assistance in both respects. 


V. 32- 37. The Believers are of one Mind, and have all Things 


common. 


V. 32. rod mAndovs tév morevodvtay —= Td mrAROs Trev pabynrady in 
6,2. ‘The description which is given here was one that applied to 
the entire church. Meyer supposes those only to be meant who 
were mentioned ,in vy. 4; but the mind does not recall readily so 
distant a remark. — ov8¢ cis, not even one. — @deyev iSiov eivar, said 
that it was his own, i. e. insisted on his right to it so long as others 
were destitute, see v. 34. — xowd, common in the use of. their prop- 
erty, not necessarily in the possession of it. Compare the Note on 
2,44 sq. ‘It is proper to remark,” says Bishop Blomfield,* ‘ that 
although an absolute community of goods existed, in a certain sense, 





* Lectures on the Acts of the Apostles, third edition, p. 28. 


CHAP. IV. 32—36.| NOTES. 77 


amongst the first company of believers, it was not insisted upon by 
the apostles as a necessary feature in the constitution of the chris- 
tian church. We find many precepts in the Epistles, which dis- 
tinctly recognize the difference of rich and poor, and mark out the 
respective duties of each class ; and the apostle Paul, in particular, 
far from enforcing a community of goods, enjoins those who were 
affluent to make a contribution every week for those who were 
poorer (1 Cor. 16, 2.3). Yet the spirit of this primitive system 
should pervade the church in all ages. All Christians ought to con- 
sider their worldly goods, in a certain sense, as the common prop- 
erty of their brethren. A certain part they may and ought to 
appropriate to their own wants and to the maintenance of their 
proper station in life ; but there is a part which by the laws of God 
and nature belongs to their brethren; who, if they cannot implead 
them for its wrongful detention before an earthly tribunal, have their 
right and title to it written by the finger of God himself in the 
records of the gospel, and will see it established at the judgment- 
day.” 

V. 33. peydry Suvdper, with great power, effect on the minds of 
men, see Matt. 9, 29; Luke 4,32. The expression refers to the 
miracles which they wrought, only in as far as these contributed 
to the efficacy of their preaching. — ydpis some understand of the 
favor which the Christians enjoyed with the people in consequence 
of their liberality ; see 2,47 (Grot., Kuin., Olsh.). It is better, 
with De Wette, Meyer, and others, to retain the ordinary sense: 
divine favor, grace, of which their liberality was an effect ; comp. 
2 Cor. 9, 14. 
 V. 84. odd yap, x. 7. d., For (a proof of their reception of 
such grace) there was no one needy, left to suffer among them.— 
xepiov, estates, landed possessions, see 5, 3. 8; Matt. 26, 36; 
Mark 14, 32. — wedoivres illustrates the occasional use of the pres- 
ent participle as an imperfect : they sold and bought. W. § 46.6; 
S. § 173. 2. 

V. 35. eridow.... rév aroorddwv, placed them at the feet of the 
apostles, see v. 37; 5,2. This appears to have been a figurative 
expression, signifying to commit entirely to their care or disposal. 
It may have arisen from the Oriental custom of laying gifts or 
tribute before the footstool of kings. — dvedidoro is impersonal ; it 
was distributed. — xaOért .... eiyev occurs as in 2, 45. 

V. 36. 4é subjoins an example in illustration of what is said in 


78 NOTES. [CHAP. IV. 36-—V. 1. 


v. 34, 35. — BapvdBas is the individual of this name who became 
subsequently so well known as Paul’s associate in missionary la- 
bors; see 13,2 sq. The appellation which he received from the 
apostles describes a particular trait in his style of preaching. Most 
suppose it to be derived from 7833} 13, i.e. son of prophecy, but 
in a more restricted sense = vids mapaxAnoews, son of consolation, 
since mpodnreia includes also hortatory, consolatory discourse ; 
comp. 1 Cor. 14,3. For other conjectures, see Kuinoel ad loc. — 
Aevirns.. He was probably a Levite, in distinction from iepeds, a 
priest, i.e. a descendant of Levi, but not of the family of Aaron. 

V. 37. dypod. It is not said that this estate was in Cyprus, but 
that is naturally inferred. The Levites, as a tribe, had no part in 
the general division of Canaan (see Numb. 18, 20); but that ex- 
clusion did not destroy the right of individual ownership * within 
the forty-eight cities and the territory adjacent to them, which were 
assigned to the Levites (Numb. 35, 1-8); comp. e. g. Lev. 25, 
32; Jer. 32,8. After the exile they would naturally exercise the 
same right even out of Palestine. —7é6 ypjya, the money, which is 
the proper sense of the plural ; comp. 8, 18. 20; 24, 26. 





CHAPTER V. 


V.1-11. The Falsehood of Ananias and Sapphira, and their 
Death. 


‘‘ Tue history of the infant church has presented hitherto an 
image of unsullied light; it is now for the first time that a shadow 
falls upon it. We can imagine that a sort of holy emulation had 
sprung up among the first Christians; that they vied with each 
other in testifying their readiness to part with every thing superflu- 
ous in their possession, and to devote it to the wants of the church. 
This zeal now bore away some, among others, who had not yet been 
freed in their hearts from the predominant love of earthly things. 
Such a person was Ananias, who, having sold a portion of his 
property, kept back a part of the money which he received for it. 
The root of his sin lay in his vanity, his ostentation. He coveted 





* See Saalschitz, Das Mosaische Recht, Vol. I. p. 149. 


CHAP. V. 1-4.] NOTES. 79 


the reputation of appearing to be as disinterested as the others; 
while at heart he was still the slave of Mammon, and so must seek 
to gain by hypocrisy what he could not deserve by his benevo- 
lence.” (Olsh.) 

V. 1. 8é puts the conduct of Ananias in contrast with that of 
Barnabas and the other Christians. — xrijya, a possession of the na- 
ture defined in v. 3. 

V.2. éevoodicaro ard ris tysqs, kept back, reserved for himself, 
from the price. The genitive, which in classical Greek usually 
follows a partitive verb like this (K. § 271. 2), depends oftener in 
the New Testament on a preposition. W. § 30.7. c.— ovveidvias, 
being privy to it, i. e. the reservation just mentioned ; comp, v. 9 ; 
not sc. air, i. e. knowing it as well as he, which is expressed by 
kai. — pépos tt, @ certain part, which he pretended was all he had 
received. 

V.3. dari, why, demands a reason for his yielding to a tempta- 
tion which he ought to have repelled. ‘The question recognizes his 
freedom of action. Compare James 4,7. The sin is charged 
upon him as his own act in the next verse. —éAjpocev tiv kapdiay 
cov, has filled, possessed, thy heart ; comp. John 13, 27. — pevoa- 
cOa.... dyov, that thou shouldst deceive the Holy Spirit, i. e. the 
apostles, to whom God revealed himself by the Spirit. The infini- 
tive is telic (Mey., De Wet.), and the purpose is predicated, not of 
Ananias, but of the tempter. Satan’s object was to instigate to the 
act, and that he accomplished. Some make the infinitive ecbatic, 
and as the intention of Ananias was frustrated, must then render 
that thou shouldst attempt to deceive. This is forced and unneces- 
sary. — Tov xepiov, the estate, field ; see 4, 34. 

V. 4.  odyi pévov, sc. kerja, x. 7. d., Did it not, while it remained 
unsold, remain to you as your own property ? and when sold was it 
not, i. e. the money received for it, in your own power? This 
language makes it evident that the community of goods as it ex- 
isted in the church at Jerusalem was purely a voluntary thing, and 
not required by the apostles. Ananias was not censured because 
he had not surrendered his entire property, but for falsehood in 
professing to have done so when he had not.— ri ér: stands con- 
cisely for ri éorw én, as in v. 9; Mark 2, 16; Luke 2, 49 (Frtz., 
Mey., De Wet.). It is a classical idiom, but not common. — @ov 
ev TH Kapdia cov, hast put in thy heart, conceived. The expression 
has a Hebraistic coloring ; comp. ay-by Dy, Dan. 1,8; Mal. 2, 2. 


80 NOTES. [cHap. v. 4-6. 


It occurs again in 19, 21.— ovk éWeidow.... 6e6 is an intensive 
way of saying that the peculiar enormity of his sin consisted in its 
being committed against God. He had attempted to deceive men 
also; but that aspect of his conduct was so unimportant in com- 
parison with the other, that it is overlooked, denied. Compare 
Matt. 10, 20; 1 Thess. 4, 8. See W. § 59. 8. b. It is logically 
correct to translate ov«.... ddAda, not so much .... as, but is incor- 
rect in form, and less forcible. éyevow governs the dative here, as 
in the Septuagint, but never in the classics. W. § 31. 2. 

V. 5. egeuge, expired. — kat éyévero, x. tr. X. Luke repeats this 
remark in y. 11. It applies here to the first death only, the report 
of which spread rapidly, and produced everywhere the natural 
effect of so awful a judgment. Some editors (Lachm., Mey., 
T'schdf.) strike out ratra after dkovoyras. It is wanting in A, B, D, 
Vulg., et al.,and may have been inserted from v. 11. If it be 
genuine, however, it may refer to a single event, especially when 
that is viewed in connection with its attendant circumstances. The 
plural does not show that the writer would include also the death 
of Sapphira, i. e. that he speaks here proleptically, which is De 
Wette’s view. 

V. 6. of veorepor — veavioxon in v. 10, i. e. the younger men in 
the assembly, in distinction from the older (Neand., De Wet.). It 
devolved on them naturally to perform this service, both on account 
of their greater activity and out of respect to their superiors in age. 
Some have conjectured (Kuin., Olsh., Mey.) that they were a class 
of regular assistants or officers in the church. That opinion has 
no support, unless it be favored by this passage. — ovvécreidav, 
wrapped up, shrouded. —é£evéyxavres, having carried forth out of 
the house and beyond the city. Except in the case of kings or 
other distinguished persons, the Jews did not bury within the walls 
of their towns. See Jahn’s Archeol. § 206. This circumstance 
accounts for the time which elapsed before the return of the bearers. 
It was customary for the Jews to bury the dead much sooner than 
is common with us. The reason for this despatch is found partly 
in the fact that decomposition takes place very rapidly after death 
in warm climates (comp. John 11, 39), and partly in the peculiar 
Jewish feeling respecting the defilement incurred by contact with a 
dead body ; see Numb. 19, 11 sq. The interment in the case of 
Ananias may have been hastened somewhat by the extraordinary 
occasion of his death; but even under ordinary circumstances, a 


CHAP. V. 6—11.] NOTES. 81 


person among the Jews was commonly buried the same day on 
which he died. See Win. Realw. art. Leichen. 

V.7. éyévero.... kai, Now it came to pass, — there was an in- 
terval of about three hours,—then, etc. as.... Suéornpa is not 
here the subject of éyévero, but forms a parenthetic clause, and kai 
(see on 1, 10) introduces the apodosis of the sentence (Frtz., De 
Wet., Mey.). For the same construction, comp. Matt. 15, 32; 
Mark 8, 2 (in the correct text); Luke 9, 28. See W. § 64. 
I. 1. The minute specification of time here imparts an air of 
reality to the narrative. — eio7\dev, came in, i. e. to the place of as- 
sembly. ; 

V. 8.  dmexpién avrg, addressed her, after the manner of 73) ; 
see on 3,12. De Wette inclines to the ordinary Greek sense : 
answered, i. e. upon her salutation. — rocovrov is the genitive of 
price: for so much, and no more, pointing, says Meyer, to the 
money which lay there within sight. Kuinoel’s better view is that 
Peter named the sum; but, it being unknown to the writer, he sub- 
stitutes for it an indefinite term, like our ‘**so much,” or “ so and 
so.” ‘This sense is appropriate to the woman’s reply. 

V.9. cuvehavnbn ipiv, has it been agreed, concerted, by you. 
The dative occurs after the passive, instead of the genitive with 
ind, when the agent is not only the author of the act, but the per- 
son for whose benefit the act is performed. K. § 284. 11.— 
mepaca To mvedpa, to tempt, put to trial, the Spirit as possessed by 
the apostles, whether he can be deceived or not; see on v. 3. — 
idod of modes, x. T. ., Behold the feet, etc. ; i.e. their returning steps 
may be heard, as it were, at the door. 

_ V.10. sapaxpipa, immediately after this declaration of Peter. 

It is evident that the writer viewed the occurrence as supernatural, 
The second death was not only instantaneous, like the first, but took 
place precisely as Peter had foretold. The woman lay dead at the 
apostle’s feet, as the men entered who had just borne her husband 
to the grave. | 

V. 11. See on v. 5.— PdBos peyas. To produce this impres- 
sion both in the church and out of it was doubtless one of the ob- 
jects which the death of Ananias and Sapphira was intended to 
-accomplish. The punishment inflicted on them, while it displayed 
the just abhorrence with which God looked upon this particular in- 
stance of prevarication, was important also as a permanent testi- 
mony against similar offences in every age of the church. ‘Such 

il 


82 NOTES. [CHAP. V. 11—13. 


severity in the beginning of Christianity,” says Benson,* ‘“ was 
highly proper, in order to prevent any occasion for like punish- 
ments for the time to come. Thus Cain, the first murderer, was 
most signally punished by the immediate hand of God. Thus, upon 
the erecting of God’s temporal kingdom among the Jews, Nadab 
and Abihu were struck dead for offering strange fire before the 
Lord. And Korah and his company were swallowed up alive by 
the earth, for opposing Moses, the faithful servant of God; and the 
two hundred and fifty men, who offered incense upon that occasion, 
were consumed by a fire, which came out from the Lord. And, 
lastly, Uzzah, for touching the ark, fell by as sudden and remark- 
able a divine judgment, when the kingdom was going to be estab- 
lished in the house of David, to teach Israel a reverence for God 
and divine things. Nay, in establishing even human laws, a severe 
punishment upon the first transgressors doth oft prevent the pun- 
ishment of others, who are deterred from like attempts by the suf- 
fering of the first criminals.” 


V. 12-16. The Apostles still preach, and confirm their Testi- 
mony by Miracles. 


V. 12. 6¢, continuative. —oAda in this position qualifies the 
two nouns more strongly than when joined with the first of them, 
as in 2, 43. The first and last places in a Greek sentence may be 
emphatic. K. § 348. 6.— kal joav, x. 7. X., and they were all with 
one mind in Solomon’s porch, i. e. from day to day. It was their 
custom to repair thither and preach to the people whom they found 
in this place of public resort.. dmavres refers to the apostles men- 
tioned in the last clause Ones De Wet., Mey.). Bengel extends 
it to all the believers. 

V. 13. ray S€ Nourdv, of the rest, i. e. those who had not yet 
joined the christian party, called 6 Aads just below. — kodAdraoba 
avrois, to associate with them, see 9,26; 10, 28; lit. join them- 
selves to them. So deeply had the miracles wrought by the apos- 
tles impressed the multitude, that they looked upon those who per- 
formed them with a sort of religious awe, and were afraid to mingle 
freely with them. ‘That the other Christians had no such fear of 
the apostles, Luke deemed it superfluous to mention. — A comma is 





“ History of the First Planting of the Christian Religion, etc., Vol. I. 
p. 105, 


CHAP. V. 13—17.] NOTES. - 83 


the proper point after avrois. — dd’, but, as opposed to what they 
refrained from doing. —épeydAuvey adrovs, magnified, esteemed and 
honored, them. 

V. 14. This verse is essentially parenthetic, but contains a re- 
mark which springs from the one just made. One of the ways in 
which the people testified their regard for the Christians was, that 
individuals of them were constantly passing over to the side of the 
latter. — padrov bé, and still more, comp. 9,22; Luke 5, 15.— 
7 kupig many connect with morevoyres; but a comparison with 
11, 24 shows that it depends rather on the verb. The Lord here 
is Christ. 

V. 15. dere binds this verse to v. 138. We have here an illus- 
tration of the extent to which the people carried their confidence in 
the apostles. — xara ras mAareias, along the streets. W. § 53. d.— 
emt KAwav, Kat kpaBBarwv, upon beds and pallets. The latter was a 
cheaper article used by the common people. See Dict. of Antt. 
art. Lectus. The rich and the poor grasped at the present oppor- 
tunity to be healed of their diseases. — épxouévov Térpov, as Peter 
was passing. ‘The genitive does not depend on oxa, but is abso- 
lute. — kdv == kat eav, at least (vel, modo); comp. Mark 6, 56; 
2 Cor. 11, 16. In this use the separate force of the parts, even if, 
has been lost. See Klotz ad Devar. Vol. II. p. 139. 

V.16. dceveis omits the article here, but has it in v. 15. It 
is there generic, here partitive: sick, sc. persons. K. § 244. 8. 
6xAoupévous, k. T. A., being added to aceveis, distinguishes the pos- 
sessed or demoniacs from those affected by ordinary maladies; 
comp. 8, 7.—dkaédprov, unclean, i. e. morally corrupt, utterly 
_ wicked, comp. 19, 12. 


‘ 
V. 17-25. Renewed Imprisonment of the Apostles, and their 
Escape. 


VAT dvacrds, rising up, not from his seat in the council (for 
the council is not said to have been in session), but = proceeding 
to act. Kuinoel calls it redundant. See further, on 9, 18. — The 
dpxvepevs is probably Annas, who was before mentioned under that 
title. Some suppose Caiaphas, the actual high-priest, to be intended. 
See on 4, 6. — of ody atr@ are not his associates in the Sanhedrim 
(for they are distinguished from these in v. 21), but, according to 
the more obvious relation of the words to aipesis rév SaddSovkaior, 
those with him in sympathy and opinion, i. e. the sect of the Sad- 


84 NOTES. [cHAP. v. 17-24. 


ducees ; comp. 14,4. Josephus states that most of the higher class 
in his day belonged to that party, though the mass of the people 
were Pharisees. — (jdov, indignation (18, 45), not envy; a He- 
braistic sense. 

V. 18. émt rods amoorédous, viz. Peter (v. 29) and others of them, 
but probably not the entire twelve. They were lodged in the pub- 
lic prison, so as to be kept more securely. The idea is too remote 
to suppose that dnyooig means that they were treated as common 
malefactors. 

V. 20. sopetecbe is present, because the act is a continued one ; 
see 3, 6. — ra pnuara rhs Cons ravrns, the words of this life, eternal 
life which you preach, comp. 13, 26. W.§ 34. 2. b. Olshausen 
refers rains to the angel: this life of which I speak to you; Light- 
foot to the Sadducees: this life which they deny. 

V.21. sapayevopevos, having come, i.e. .to the place of assem- 
bly, which was probably a room in the temple, see 6, 14; Matt. 27, 
3 sq. On some occasions they met at the house of the high-priest, 
see Matt. 26, 57.—-kxai racay tiv yepovoiay, and all the eldership, 
senate connected with the Sanhedrim; comp. 4,5; 22,5. The 
prominence thus given to that branch of the council exalts our idea 
of its dignity. The term reminds us of men who were venerable 
for their years and wisdom. Kuinoel would emphasize racay, as if 
the attendance of that order was full at this time, but was not al- 
ways so. Some (Lightf., Olsh., Str., Mey.) think that this was not 
an ordinary session of the Sanhedrim, but that the elders of the 
nation at large were called upon to give their advice in the present 
emergency. 

V. 22. of Snnpérar, the servants who executed the orders of the 
Sanhedrim, see v.26. Some é6f the temple jy may have acted 
in this capacity, see on 4, 1. 

V. 24. 6 fepeds, the priest by way of eminence (1 Macc. 15. 1; 
Jos. Antt. 6. 12. 1), hence = dpysepeds, as he is termed in v. 17; 
4, 6.— On of dpyuepeis, see 4. 6. — dinmopovy mepi avrav, were per- 
plexed concerning them, i. e. the words reported, not the apos- 
tles (Mey.). Adyous is the more obvious antecedent, — ri dy yevouro 
rovro, what this would become, how it would affect the public mind 
in regard to the Christians and their doctrine. rodro refers to the 
miraculous liberation. 


CHAP. V. 26-29, | NOTES. 85 


V. 26-28. They are arrested again, and brought before the 
Council. 


V. 26. iva pr) ALbacOdow We are to connect with od pera Bias: 
They brought them without violence,— that they might not be 
stoned. éoBotvro yap tov Aadvy forms a parenthetic remark, the 
logical force of which is the same as if it had stood at the close of 
the sentence. The English translation assumes an impossible con- 
nection, as after verbs of fearing py, pyres, and the like follow, 
never iva pn. W.§ 60. 2. R. ‘Tischendorf puts a comma after 
Bias, instead of a colon, as in some editions. 

V. 28. smapayyedia rapnyyciAaper. See the Note on 4, 17. —ézi 
T® dvdyart tovrm, upon (as their authority, see 4, 18) this name, 
which was too well known to be mentioned. — éwayayeiy .... aipa, 
i. e. fix upon us the guilt of having shed his blood as that of an 
innocent person; comp. Matt. 23, 35.— rod dvOpemov rovrov is not 
of itself contemptuous (comp. Luke 23, 47; John 7,46), but could 
have that turn given to it by the voice. 


V. 29-32. The Answer of Peter, and its Effect. 


V. 29. kal of drécrohon, and the other apostles. Peter spoke in 
their name, see 2, 14.—eiapyeiv .... avOparos. The Jews, 
though as a conquered nation they were subject to the Romans, 
acknowledged the members of the Sanhedrim as their legitimate 
rulers; and the injunction which the Sanhedrim imposed on the 
apostles at this time emanated from the highest human authority 
to which they could have felt that they owed allegiance. . The in- 
junction which this authority laid on the apostles clashed with their 
religious convictions, their sense of the rights of the infinite Ruler, 
and in this conflict between human law and divine, they declared 
that the obligation to obey God was paramount to every other. 
The apostles and early Christians acted on the principle, that hu- 
man governments forfeit their claim to obedience when they require 
what God has plainly forbidden, or forbid what he has required. 
They claimed the right of judging for themselves what was right 
and what was wrong in reference to their religious and their politi- 
cal duties, and they regulated their conduct by that decision. It is 
worthy of notice, that in 4, 19 they propound this principle as one 
which even their persecutors could not controvert, i. e. as one 
which commends itself to every man’s reason and unperverted 


86 NOTES. [cHAP. V. 29-32. 


moral feelings.* In applying this principle, it will be found that 
the apostles.in every instance abstained from all forcible resistance 
to the public authorities ; they refused utterly to obey the mandates 
which required them to violate their consciences, but they endured 
quietly the penalties which the executors of the law enforced 
against them; they evaded the pursuit of their oppressors if they 
could (2 Cor. 11, 82. 33), secreted themselves from arrest (12, 19), 
left their prisons at the command of God, yet when violent hands 
were laid upon them, and they were dragged before magistrates, to 
the dungeon, or to death, they resisted not the wrong, but ‘ followed 
his steps, who, when he suffered, threatened not, but committed 
himself to Him that judgeth righteously ” (1 Pet. 2, 22. 23). 

V. 30. réy warépor recalls to mind the series of promises which 
God had made to provide a Saviour, comp. 3, 25. — #yeipev, raised 
up, sent into the world; comp. 3, 22; 13, 23. So Calvin, Bengel, 
De Wette, and others. Some supply ék vexpdv, raised up from the 
dead ; but that idea being involved in tyace below, would intro- 
duce a repetition at variance with the brevity of the discourse. — 
diexerpicacbe, slew, 26, 21. — EvAov = oravpod, a Hebraism. It oc- 
curs especially where the Jews are spoken of as having crucified 
the Saviour (10, 39; 13, 29). 

V. 31.  dpxnydv kat carqpa belong as predicates to rodroyv: this 
one (as, who is) a prince and a Saviour ; not to the verb: ewalted 
to be a prince, etc. (Eng. vers.).— 19 Se&ia airod, to his right 
hand, as in 2, 33. — Sodva: perdvoiav, to give repentance, i. e. the 
grace or disposition to exercise it; comp. 8, 16; 18, 27; John 16, 
7. 8. Some understand it of the opportunity to repent, or the pro- 
vision of mercy which renders repentance available to the sinner 
(De Wet.). That idea is expressed in Heb. 12, 17, by rémoy pera-. 
voias. In both cases the exaltation of Christ is represented as se- 
curing the result in question, because it was the consummation of 
his work, and gave effect to all that preceded. 

V.32. dprupes governs here two genitives, one of a person, the 
other of a thing; see Phil. 2, 30; Heb. 13, 7. W. § 30. R.3; 
K. § 275. R. 6. Since their testimony was true, they must declare 





* Socrates avowed this principle, when in his defence he said to his 
judges meicopa d€ paddov TH Oc 7) bpiv (Plat. Apol. 29. D); and unless 
the plea be valid, he died as a felon and not asa martyr. See other heathen 
testimonies to the same effect in Wetstein’s Novum Testamentum, Vol. II. 
p. 478. 


CHAP. V. 32 — 36. | NOTES. 87 


it; no human authority could deter them from it ; comp. 4, 20. — 
TO mvedpa Td dytov, SC. adtod paprup.— Tois meBapxodow aire, to those 
who obey him, i. e. by receiving the gospel, comp. 6,7. Many 
suppose the apostle to refer chiefly to the special gifts which the 
Spirit conferred on so many of the first Christians, in order to con- 
firm their faith as the truth of God. What took place on the day 
of Pentecost was a testimony of this nature, and that or some 
equivalent sign was repeated on other occasions ; comp. 10, 45 ; 
19, 6; Mark 16,20. But to that outward demonstration we may 
add also the inward witness of the Spirit, which believers receive 
as the evidence of their adoption; comp. Rom. 8, 16; Gal. 4, 6; 
1 John 3, 24. Neander interprets the language entirely of this 
internal manifestation. Since the Holy Spirit testified to the gos- 
pel in both ways, and since the remark here is unqualified, we 
have no reason to consider the expression less extensive than the 
facts in the case. 

V.33. Sierpiovro, were convulsed with rage, lit. were sawn asun- 
der, torn in pieces. The English version supplies “to the heart,” 
from 7,54. Some render sawed, gnashed, their teeth ; which would 
require tovs ddovras as the expressed object of the verb. — éBovdev- 
ovro, resolved, determined, see 15, 37 ; John 12,10; but on the rep- 
resentation of Gamaliel they recalled their purpose. Instead of 
passing a formal vote, it is more probable that they declared their 
intention by some tumultuous expression of their feelings. 


V. 34-39. The Advice of Gamaliel. 


V. 34. ripsos governs Aad, as allied to words denoting judgment, 
estimation. See W..§ 31. 3. b.; Mt. § 388. The character 
‘which Luke ascribes to Gamaliel in this passage agrees with that 
which he bears in the Talmud. He appears there, also, as a zeal- 
ous Pharisee, as unrivalled in that age for his knowledge of the 
law, as a distinguished teacher (see 22,3), and as possessing an 
enlarged, tolerant spirit, far above the mass of his countrymen. 
He is said to have lived still some fifteen years or more after this 
scene in the council. —paxi refers evidently to time, not to space 
(Eng. vers.). 

V. 35. ie. What follows is probably an outline of the speech. 
—éni rois avOpamros rovros some join with mpocéxere (Eng. vers.) ; 
others with ri pedAere mpdooew (Kuin., De Wet., Mey.). émi admits 
of either connection (W. § 65. 4), but as mpdooew mm éxi tun is not 


88 NOTES. [CHAP. V. 35, 36. 


uncommon in Greek (Wetst.), it is better to recognize an instance 
of that expression here. 

V. 36. mpd rovrwv rév ipepav, Before these times. This is not 
the first time that zealots or seditionists have appeared ; they may 
have come forth with great pretensions, but ere long have closed 
their career with defeat and ignominy. For the sake of effect (ob- 
serve ydp), Gamaliel puts the case as if the prisoners would turn 
out to be persons of this stamp; but before closing he is careful to 
remind his associates that there was another possibility ; see v. 39. 
— @evdas. Josephus mentions an insurrectionist of this name, who 
appeared in the reign of Claudius, some ten years after the delivery 
of this speech. Gamaliel, therefore, must refer here to another 
man of this name ; and this man, since he preceded Judas the Gali- 
lean (v. 37), could not have lived much later than the reign of 
Herod the Great. The year of that monarch’s death, as Josephus 
states, was remarkably turbulent; the land was overrun with bel- 
ligerent parties, under the direction of insurrectionary chiefs, or 
fanatics. Josephus mentions but three of these disturbers by 
name ; he passes over the others with a general allusion. Among 
those whom the Jewish historian has omitted to name, may have 
been the Theudas whom Gamaliel has here in view. The name 
was not an uncommon one (Win. Realw. Vol. II. p. 609); and it 
can excite no surprise that one Theudas, who was an insurgent, 
should have appeared in the time of Augustus, and another fifty 
years later, in the time of Claudius. Josephus gives an account of 
four men named Simon, who followed each other within forty 
years, and of three named Judas, within ten years, who were all 
instigators of rebellion. This mode of reconciling Luke with Jose- 
phus is approved by Lardner, Bengel, Kuinoel, Olshausen, Anger; 
Winer, and others.* 

Another very plausible supposition is that Luke’s Theudas may 
have been identical with one of the three insurgents whom Jose- 
phus designates by name. Sonntag, who agrees with those who 
adopt this view, has supported it with much learning and ability. 7 
He maintains that the Theudas mentioned by Gamaliel is the indi- 





* Even the Jewish historian, Jost, in his Geschichte der Israeliten, as- 
sents to this explanation, and admits the credibility of Luke as well as of 
Josephus. 

t In the Theologische Studien und Kritiken, 1837, p. 622 sq., translated 
by the writer in the Bibliotheca Sacra, 1848, p. 409 sq. 


CHAP. V. 36, 37.] NOTES. 89 


vidual who occurs in Josephus under the name of Simon, a slave 
of Herod, who attempted to make himself king, in the year of that 
monarch’s death. He urges the following reasons for that opinion ; 
— first, this Simon, as he was the most noted among those who dis- 
turbed the public peace at that time, would be apt to occur to 
Gamaliel as an illustration of his point; secondly, he is described 
as a man of the same lofty pretensions (iva: d&ios éXrioas map’ évrt- 
voov = héyev eivai twa éavrov); thirdly, he died a violent death, 
which Josephus does not mention as true of the other two insur- 
gents ; fourthly, he appears to have had comparatively few ad- 
herents, in conformity with Luke’s act rerpaxocioy ; and, lastly, 
his having been originally a slave accounts for the twofold appella- 
tion, since it was very common among the Jews to assume a differ- 
ent name on changing their occupation or mode of life. It is very 
possible, therefore, that Gamaliel speaks of him as Theudas, be- 
cause, having borne that name so long at Jerusalem, he was best 
known by it to the members of the Sanhedrim ; and that Josephus, 
on the contrary, who wrote for Romans and Greeks, speaks of him 
as Simon, because it was under that name that he set himself up as 
king, and in that way acquired his foreign notoriety. (Tacit. Hist. 
5. 9.) — There can be no valid objection to either of the foregoing 
suppositions ; both are reasonable, and both must be disproved be- 
fore Luke can be justly charged with having committed an anach- 
ronism in this passage. — eivai twa, was some one of importance. 
ris has often that emphatic force. W. § 25. 2. c. 

V. 37. “Iovdas 6 Tadiaios, x. tr. A. Josephus mentions this man, 
and his account either confirms or leaves undenied every one of the 
particulars stated or intimated by Luke. See Bell. Jud. 2.8.1; 
Antt. 18. 1.6; 20.5. 2. He calls him twice 6 Taddaios, though 
he terms him also 6 TavAovirns in Antt. 18. 1. 1, from the fact that 
he was born at Gamala, in lower Gaulonitis. He was known as the 
Galilean, because he lived subsequently in Galilee (De Wet.), or 
because that province may have included Gaulonitis. The epithet 
served to distinguish him from another Judas, a revolutionist who 
appeared some ten years earlier than this. — éy rais jyépas rijs 
droypapijs, in the days of the registration, i. e. in this instance, of 
persons and property with a view to taxation (Jos. Antt. 15. 1. 1), 
The droypagpy in Luke 2, 1, which took place at the birth of Christ, 
is supposed generally to have been a census merely of the popula- 
tion. We learn from Josephus, that soon after the dethronement of 

12 


90 NOTES. [cHAP. V. 37—39. 


Archelaus, about the year A. D. 6 or 7, the Emperor Augustus or- 
dered a tax to be levied on the Jews. The payment of that tax 
Judas instigated the people to resist, on the ground of its being a 
violation of their allegiance to Jehovah to pay tribute to a foreign 
power; comp. Matt. 22,17. He took up arms in defence of this 
principle, and organized a powerful opposition to the Roman gov- 
ernment. — kdkeivos, x. t. A. Josephus relates that this rebellion 
was effectually suppressed, and that many of those who had taken 
part in it were captured and crucified by the Romans. He says 
nothing of the fate of Judas himself. SsecxopricOnoay describes 
very justly such a result of the enterprise. Coponius was then 
procurator of Judea, and Quirinus, or Cyrenius (Luke 2, 2), was 
proconsul of Syria. 

V. 38. édoare airots, let them alone; not sc. dmedbciv, suffer 
them to depart. —% Bovdz).... Todo, this plan, enterprise, or (more 
correctly) work, since it was already in progress. — xaradvOnoerat, 
i. e. without any interference on your part. 

V.39. pnmore.... etpebjre. Critics differ as to the dependence 
of this clause. Some (Grot., Kuin., Rob.) supply before it dpare, 
or an equivalent word, see Luke 21, 34: Take heed lest ye be 
found also fighting against God, as well as men. Others (Bng., 
Mey.) find the ellipsis in od StvacGe xaradica adrovs, thus: Ye can- 
not destroy it, and should not, lest ye also, etc. ai, in both cases, 
includes naturally the idea both of the impiety and the futility of 
the attempt. De Wette assents to those who connect the words with 
édoare avrovs, in the last verse. ‘This is the simplest construction, 
as pnmore follows appropriately after such a verb, and the sense is 
then complete without supplying any thing. In this case some 
editors would put what intervenes in brackets; but that is incorrect, 
inasmuch as the caution here presupposes the alternative in «i de éx 
Oeod éorw. — The advice of Gamaliel was certainly remarkable, 
and some of the early christian fathers went so far as to ascribe it 
to an unavowed attachment to the gospel. The supposition has no 
historical support ; and there are other motives which explain his 
conduct. ‘Gamaliel, as Neander remarks, was a man who had dis- 
cernment ‘enough to see, that, if this were a fanatical movement, it 
would be rendered more violent by opposition ; that all attempts to 
suppresswhat is insignificant tend only to raise it into more impor- 
tance. On the other hand, the manner in which the apostles spoke 
and acted may have produced some impression upon a mind not 


CHAP. V. 39—42.] NOTES. | 91 


entirely prejudiced, and so much the more since their strict observ- 
ance of the law, and their hostile attitude towards Sadduceeism, 
must have rendered him favorably disposed towards them. Hence 
the thought may have arisen in his mind, that possibly, after all, 
there might be something divine in their cause. 


V. 40-42. The Apostles suffer joyfully for Christ, and depart to 
preach him anew. 


V. 40. eéneicOnoay aira, were persuaded by him. They could not 
object to his views, they were so reasonable ; they were probably 
influenced still more by his personal authority. — deipavres, having 
scourged. ‘The instrument commonly used for this purpose was a 
whip, or scourge, consisting often of two lashes “knotted with 
bones, or heavy indented circles of bronze, or terminated by hooks, 
in which case it was aptly denominated a scorpion.” Dict. of 
Antt., art. Flagrum. ‘The punishment was inflicted on the naked 
back of the sufferer ; comp. 16,22. A single blow would some- 
times lay the flesh open to the bones. Hence, to scourge a person 
meant properly to flay him. Paul says that he suffered this punish- 
ment five times (2 Cor. 14, 24). 

V.41. of pe. The antithesis does not follow. — ody, illative, 
i.e. in consequence of their release. — ér, because, appends an 
explanation of yaipoyres, not of the verb. tzep rov dvopuaros, in be- 
half of the name,i. e. of Jesus, which is omitted as well known 
(comp. 3 John v. 7), or more probably because it has occurred just 
before. ‘The common text, indeed, reads avrod, but without suffi- 
cient authority. — KarnéiOnoay aripacOjva,—a bold oxymoron, — 
were accounted worthy to-be disgraced. For an explanation of the 
paradox, see Luke 16,15. The verbs refer to different standards 
of judgment. 

V.42. kar’ oixoy refers to their private assemblies in different 
parts of the city as distinguished from their labors & r@ iepd. 
Those who reject the distributive sense in 2, 46, reject it also here. 
— ovk,éravovto diSdckovres, ceased not to teach. The Greek in sucha 
case employs a participle, not the infinitive, as the complement of 
the verb. K.§ 310. 4. f; W. § 46. 1. a. 


92 NOTES. [CHAP. VI. 1, 2. 


CHAPTER VI. 


V. 1-7. Appointment of Alms-Distributers in the Church at 
Jerusalem. 


V.1. & rats jpepas tavras. See on 1,15. We may assign 
the events in this chapter to the year A. D. 35. They relate more 
or less directly to the history of Stephen, and must have taken 
place shortly before his death, which was just before Paul’s conver- 
sion. — 7AnOvvovrav, becoming numerous. — trav ‘EXAnnotrév should 
be rendered, not Greeks = °EAAnves, but Hellenists. They were 
the Jewish members of the church who spoke the Greek language. 
The other party, the Hebrews, were the Palestine Jews, who spoke 
the Syro-Chaldaic, or Aramean. See Win. Chald. Gr. p. 10 sq. 
— rapebewpodrro is imperfect, because the neglect is charged as one 
that was common. — d:akovia, ministration, distribution of alms, 
i. e. either of food or the money necessary to procure it. Olshau- 
sen argues for the former from 79 xaOnpepu7. 

V. 2. 1d wrqO0s rav pabnray, the multitude, mass, of the disciples. 
It has been objected, that they had become too numerous at this 
time to assemble in one place. It is to be recollected, as De Wette 
suggests, that many of those who had been converted were foreign 
Jews, and had left the city ere this. — jpas xaradeivavras, x. 7. A. 
It is not certain from the narrative to what extent this labor of pro- 
viding for the poor had been performed by the apostles. The fol- 
lowing remarks of Rothe present a reasonable view of that ques- 
tion. ‘* The apostles, at first, appear to have applied themselves 
to this business, and to have expended personally the common funds 
of the church. Yet, occupied as they were with so many other 
more important objects, they could have exercised only a general 
oversight in the case, and must have committed the details of the 
matter to others. Particular individuals may not have been ap- 
pointed for this purpose at the beginning ; and the business may 
have been conducted in an informal manner, without any strict 
supervision or immediate direction on the part of the apostles. 
Under such circumstances, especially as the number of believers 
was increasing every day, it could easily happen that some of the 
needy were overlooked ; and it is not surprising that the Hellenistic 
Christians had occasion to complain of the neglect of the widows 


CHAP. VI. 2-6.] NOTES. 93 


and other poor among them.” * The complaint, therefore, implied 
no censure of the apostles, but was brought naturally to them, both 
on account of their position in the church and the general rela- 
tion sustained by them to the system under which the grievance 
had arisen. — diaxoveiy rpaméfas, to serve tables, provide for them, 
comp. Luke 4, 39; 8, 3. Some render the noun money-tables, 
counters, as in John 2, 15; but the verb connected with it here 
forbids that sense. ‘The noun is plural, because several tables were 
supported. | 

V.3. émoxéacbe, x.7.r. The selection, therefore, was made 
by the body of the church; the apostles confirmed the choice, as 
we see from xaracrncoper, and from v. 6.— paprupoupevors, testified 
to, of good repute, see 10, 22; 16, 2.— xpeias, business, lit. an 
affair which is held to be necessary. 

V.4. ti mpocevyn, prayer. ‘The article defines it as a well- 
known duty or service. — mpooxaprepnoopev. ‘This remark does not 
imply that they had been diverted already from their proper work, 
but that they wished to guard against that in future, by committing 
this care to others. ‘They now saw that it required more attention 
than they had bestowed upon it. 

‘V.5. ddpa.... dyiov. The same terms describe the character ° 
of Barnabas in 11, 24.— Of Philip, we read again in 8, 8 sq.; 
21,8. The others are not known out of this passage. That Nico- 
laus was the founder of the sect mentioned in Rev. 2, 6, isa con- 
jecture without proof. Many have supposed that the entire seven 
were chosen from the aggrieved party. Gieseler thinks that three 
of them may have been Hebrews, three Hellenists, and one a 
proselyte. Ch. Hist. § 25. Their Greek names decide nothing, 
see on 1, 23. — Luke does not term the men daxévor, though we 
have an approach to that appellation in v. 2. In 21, 8, they are 
called the Seven. Some of the ancient writers regarded them as 
the first deacons, others as entirely distinct from them. ‘The gen- 
eral opinion at present is, that this order arose from the institution 
of the Seven, but by a gradual extension of the sphere of duty at 
first assigned to them. 

V. 6. éxéOnxay, viz. the apostles. The nature of the act dictates 
this change of the subject. The imposition of hands, as practised 
in appointing persons to an office, was a symbol of the impartation 





* Die Anfinge der Christlichen Kirche und ihrer Verfassung, p. 164. 


94 NOTES. [CHAP. VI. 6-9. 


of the gifts and graces which they needed to qualify them for the 
office. It was of the nature of a prayer that God would bestow the 
necessary gifts, rather than a pledge that they were actually con- 
ferred. 

V.7. modds re, x. 7. According to Ez. 2, 86-38, the priests 
amounted to 4,289 at the time of the return from Babylon. They 
must have been still more numerous at this period. Such an ac- 
cession of such converts was a signal event in the early history of. 
the church.— 79 miore, the faith, faith-system, i. e. the gospel ; 
comp. Rom. 1,5; Gal. 1, 23, etc. This mode of epitomizing the 
plan of salvation confirms the Protestant view of it, in opposition to 
that of the Catholics. 


V. 8-15. The Zeal of Stephen and his Violent Apprehension. 


V. 8. wAnpns xdpitos, full of grace,i. e., by metonymy, of gifts 
not inherent, but conferred by divine favor, see v. 3. This is the 
correct word rather than wicreas, which some copies insert from v. 
5. — duvdpews, power, which was one of the gifts, and is specified 
on account of the next words. It was power to work miracles. 

V.9. rwés.... AiBeprivar, certain from the synagogue so called 
of the Libertines, i. e. libertini, freed-men, viz. Jews, or the sons 
of Jews, who, having been slaves at Rome, had acquired their 
freedom, and, living now at Jerusalem, maintained a separate syna- 
gogue of their own. When Pompey overran Judea, about B. C. 
63, he carried a vast number of the Jews to Rome, where they 
were sold into slavery. Most of these, or their children, the Ro- 
mans afterwards liberated, as they found it inconvenient to have 
servants who were so tenacious of the peculiar rites of their relig- 
ion. ABeprivey being unusual in this application, Luke subjoins 
Tis Aeyouevns. He designates the other Jews with reference to the 
countries where they had lived. Hence some have supposed that 
AiBeprivey must mean Libertinians, i. e. Jews from a place named 
Libertum; but no such place is known in ancient geography. 
With that sense, too, rijs Aeyouevns is nO more appropriate to their 
synagogue than to the other synagogues. — kal Kupnvaiwv, kal *AXe- 
Eavdpéwv, x. t.A. The simplest view of the construction (Mey., De 
Wet.) is that which repeats rwés before each of these genitives, 
with the implication that they formed so many distinct synagogues : 
and certain of the Cyreneans and certain of the Alexandrians, etc., 
i. e. in all five different assemblies of them. The Rabbinic writers 


CHAP. VI. 9-13. | NOTES. 95 


say, with some exaggeration, no doubt, that Jerusalem contained 
four hundred and eighty synagogues. The omission of rév before 
the first two nouns would be similar to the case in 7, 22. Winer 
(§ 18. 5) agrees with those who connect Kupnvaiwy kat ’Adeavdpéav 
with A:Beprivey, understanding these three classes to constitute 
one synagogue, and the Cilicians and Asiatics to constitute another. 
It may be objected to this, (though no interpretation is wholly 
unencumbered,) that usage would have repeated ray before each 
noun, and also that so large a number of people could not well 
have assembled at the same place of worship. Wieseler,* in sup- 
port of his opinion that Paul acquired his Roman citizenship (22, 
28) as libertinus or the descendant of a libertinus, would take xai 
before Kupnvaiay as explicative, namely, to wit ; so that they were 
all libertini, and belonged to one synagogue. ‘This is extremely 
forced and arbitrary. — Among the Cilicians who disputed with 
Stephen may have been Saul of Tarsus, see 7, 58. 

V. 10. 76 mveipari, the Spirit, see v.5.— ¢ belongs in sense 
to both nouns, but agrees with the nearest; comp. Luke 21, 15. 
Stephen experienced the truth of the promise recorded in that 
passage. 

V. 11. tméBarov, secretly instructed, suborned. — Bracdnya, 
blasphemous in the judicial sense, which made it a capital offence to 
utter such words. Contempt of Moses and his institutions was con- 
tempt of Jehovah, and came within the scope of the law against 
blasphemy as laid down in Deut. 18,6-10. It was on this charge 
that the Jews pronounced the Saviour worthy of death; see Matt. 
26, 60 sq. 

V. 12. rovs mpeoBurépovs kal rods ypappareis, 1. e. those of these 
classes who belonged to the Sanhedrim. The appeal was made 
more especially to them, because, in addition to their influence, they 
were mostly Pharisees, and the present accusation was of a nature 
to arouse especially the spirit of that sect. Hence they take the 
lead at this time, rather than the Sadducees.— cvvypracav. The 
subject here is strictly rues (see v. 9), but we think of them natu- 
rally as acting in concert with those whom they had instigated to 
join with them. 

V. 13. gornoar, placed before them, introduced (see 4, 7) ; 
others, set up, procured. — pdprupas evdeis. They accused Stephen 





* Chronologie des Apostolischen Zeitalters, p. 63. 


96 NOTES. [CHAP. VI. 13-15. 


of having spoken contemptuously of the law and the temple, and 
of having blasphemed Moses and God. Their testimony in that 
form was grossly false. It was opposed to every thing which 
Stephen had said or meant. -Yet, as Neander and others suggest, 
he had undoubtedly taught that the christian dispensation was su- 
perior to that of Moses; that the gospel was designed to supersede 
Judaism ; that the law was unavailing as a source of justification ; 
that, henceforth, true worship would be as acceptable to God in one 
place as another. In the clearness with which Stephen apprehend- 
ed these ideas, he has been justly called the forerunner of Paul. 
His accusers distorted his language on these points, and thus gave 
to their charge the only semblance of justification which it pos- 
sessed. — For dyOparos odros, see 5, 28. — rod rérov rod dyiov is the 
temple (21, 28; Ps. 24, 3, etc.), in some apartment of which they 
were assembled, as appears from rodrov in the next verse. 

V. 14. éyovros, x. tr. A. They impute to Stephen these words, 
as authorizing the inference in v. 18. — xarahioe:. It is not impos- 
sible that he had reminded them of the predictions of Christ re- 
specting the destruction of the city and the temple. — &6n, customs 
required to be observed, hence laws, 15, 1; 21, 21, etc. — mapédo- 
kev may apply to what is written as well as what is oral. 

V. 15. drevicavres eis adrév,x. t. A. They were all gazing upon 
him, as the principal object of interest in the assembly, and so much 
the more at that moment in expectation of his reply to so heinous 
acharge. The radiance, therefore, which suddenly lighted up the 
countenance of Stephen, was remarked by every one present. 
That what they saw was merely a natural expression of the seren- 
ity which pervaded his mind, can hardly be supposed. acel mpdoo- 
mov dyyéAXov seems to overstate the idea if it be reduced to that ; 
for the comparison is an unusual one, and the Jews supposed the 
visible appearance of angels to correspond with their superhuman 
rank; comp. 1, 10; Matt. 28,3; Luke 24,4; Rev. 18, 1, etc. 
The countenance of Stephen, like that of Moses on his descent 
from the mount, shone probably with a preternatural lustre, pro- 
claiming him a true witness, a servant of Him whose glory was so 
fitly symbolized by such a token. The occasion was worthy of the 
miracle. 


CHAP. VII. | NOTES. 97 


CHAPTER VIL 


Discourse of Stephen before the Sanhedrin. 


THE speaker’s main object may be considered as twofold;— . 
first, to show that the charge to which he was called upon to reply 
rested on a false view of the ancient dispensation, not on his part, 
but on that of his accusers ; and, secondly, that the Jews, in their 
pretended zeal for the temple and the law, and in their opposition 
to the gospel, were again acting out the unbelieving, rebellious 
spirit which led their fathers so often to resist the will of God, and 
reject his greatest favors. It appears to me that the latter was the 
uppermost idea in Stephen’s mind, both because it occupies so 
much space in the body of the address (v. 27, 39 —44), and be- 
cause, near the close of what is said (v. 51 sq.), it is put forward 
very much as if he regarded it as the conclusion at which he had 
been aiming. It may be objected, that this view renders the dis- 
course aggressive, criminatory, in an unusual degree; but we are 
to remember that Stephen was interrupted, and but for that, in all 
probability, after having exposed the guilt of his hearers, he would 
. have encouraged them to repent and believe on the Saviour whom 
they had crucified. 

In the interpretation of the speech, I proceed on the principle that 
most of Stephen’s hearers were so well acquainted with his pecu- 
liar views, with his arguments in support of them, and his modes 
of illustration, that they had no occasion to be distinctly reminded 
of his doctrine at this time. See the Note on 6, 13. Hence 
Stephen could assume that the bearing of the different remarks or 
occurrences brought forward in the address would suggest itself to 
the minds of his judges ; without pausing to tell them this means 
that, or that means this, he could leave them to draw silently the 
conclusions which he wished to establish. Stephen illustrates his 
subject historically, That mode of argument was well chosen. 
It enabled him to show the Jews that their own history, in which 
they gloried so much, condemned them ; for it taught the ineffica- 
cy of external rites, foreshadowed a more perfect spiritual system, 
and warned them against the example of those who resist the will 
of God when declared to them by his messengers. Stephen pur- 
sues the order of time in his narrative; and it is important to re- 

13 


. 98 NOTES. [CHAP. VII. 


mark that, because-it explains two peculiarities of the speech ;— 
first, that the ideas which fall logically under the two heads that 
have been mentioned are intermixed, instead of being presented 
separately ; and, secondly, that some circumstances are introduced 
which we are not to regard as significant, but as serving merely to 
maintain the connection of the history. 

But the address is so discursive and complex, and the purport 
of it has been so variously represented, that it is due to the subject 
to mention some of the other modes of analysis that have been 
proposed. | 

The following is Neander’s view of it. Stephen’s primary ob- 
ject was certainly apologetical, but as he forgot himself in the sub- 
ject with which he was inspired, his apologetic efforts relate to the 
truths maintained by him, and impugned by his adversaries, rather 
than to himself. Hence, not satisfied with defending, he developed 
and enforced the truths he had proclaimed ; and at the same time 
reproyed the Jews for their unbelief and their opposition to the 
gospel. Stephen first refutes the charges made against him of 
enmity against the people of God, of contempt of their sacred in- 
stitutions, and of blaspheming Moses. He traces the procedure of 
the divine providence, in guiding the people of God from the times 
of their progenitors ; he notices the promises and their progressive 
fulfilment to the end of all the promises,—the advent of the 
Messiah, and the work to be accomplished by him. But with this 
narrative he blends his charges against the Jewish nation. He 
shows that their ingratitude and unbelief became more flagrant in 
proportion as the promises were fulfilled, or given with greater ful- 
ness; and their conduct in the various preceding periods of the 
development of God’s kingdom was a specimen of the disposition 
they now evinced towards the publication of the gospel.* 

According to Olshausen,t the speaker recapitulated the Jewish 
history at such length, simply in order to testify his regard for the 
national institutions, to conciliate his hearers, and show indirectly 
that he could not have uttered the pyyara BAdogdnpa imputed to him. 
That those addressed saw their own moral image reflected so dis- 
tinctly from the narrative results from the subject, not from the 
speaker’s intention. 





* Quoted from Ryland’s Translation of the Planting and Training of the 
Christian Church. 
t Commentar Ober das Neue Testament, Vol. II. p 719. 


CHAP. VII. ] NOTES. 99 


Luger develops the course of thought in this way. Stephen is 
accused of blaspheming the temple and the law. He vindicates 
himself by exhibiting the true significance of the temple and the 
law. The main points are, first, that the daw is not something 
complete by itself, but was added to the promise given to Abraham, 
yea, contains in itself a new promise, by the fulfilment of which 
the law is first brought to completion. Secondly, the temple can- 
not be exclusively the holy place; it is one in a series of places 
which the Lord has consecrated, and by this very act foreshadowed 
that future completion of the temple, to which also Solomon and 
the prophets point. Thirdly, it being a cause of special offence to 
the Jews that the Jesus rejected by them should be represented as 
the Perfecter of the law and the temple, Stephen showed that no 
objection against him could be derived from that fact, since the 
messengers of God had been treated with the like contempt at all 
periods. Fourthly, these three topics are presented, not after each 
other, but in each other. The history of Israel forms the thread of 
the discourse, but this is related in such a manner that examples of 
the different points come into view at every step.* 

Baur’s exposition of the plan has been highly commended. 
The contents of the discourse divide themselves into two parallel 
parts : on the one side are presented the benefits which God from 
the earliest times conferred on the Jewish nation; on the other side — 
is exhibited in contrast their conduct towards him. Hence the 
main thought is this: the greater and more extraordinary the favors 
which God from the beginning bestowed on the Jews, the more un- 
thankful and rebellious from the beginning was the spirit which 
they manifested in return ; so that where a perfectly harmonious 
relation should have been found, the greatest alienation appeared. 
The greater the effort which God made to elevate and draw the 
nation to himself, the more the nation turned away from him. 
In presenting this view of the Jewish character, the speaker de- 
fended indirectly his own cause. He was accused of having 
spoken reproachfully, not only against the law, but in particular 
against the temple. Hence the direction which he gave to the 
speech enabled him to show that the idolatrous regard of the 
Jews for the temple exemplified in the highest degree that opposi- 





* Ueber Zweck, Inhalt und Eigenthamlichkeit der Rede des Stephanus. 
Von Friedrich Luger. 


100 NOTES. [CHAP. VII. 1,2 


tion between God and themselves, which had been so characteristic 
of them from the first.* 

It may be added, that the peculiar character of the speech im- 
presses upon it a seal of authenticity, for no one would think of 
framing a discourse of this kind for such an occasion. Had it 
been composed ideally, or after some vague tradition, it would have 
been thrown into a different form; its relevancy to the charge 
which called it forth would have been made more obvious. As to 
the language in which Stephen delivered it, opinions are divided. 


His disputing with the foreign Jews (6,9) would indicate that he 


was a Hellenist (comp. 9, 29), and in that case he spoke probably 
in Greek. The prevalence of that language in Palestine, and espe- 
cially at Jerusalem, would have rendered it intelligible to such an 
audience.t The manner, too, in which the citations agree with 
the Septuagint, favors this conclusion. 


V.1-16. History of the Patriarchs, or the Age of Faith. 


V.1. ei, as in 1, 6. — otras, so, as the witnesses have testified. 
This, then, was the question to which he replied, and must furnish 
the key to his answer. 

V.2. ddedpoi are the spectators, warépes the Sanhedrists, like 
our ‘ civil fathers’ ; comp. 22,1. ddpes qualifies both nouns ; see 
on 1,16. According to the English version, he addresses three 
distinct classes, instead of two. — 6 beds rijs d6&ns, the God of glory 
== 1/23 in the Old Testament, or among the later Jews MDW, 1. 
the light or visible splendor amid which Jehovah revealed himself, 
the symbol, therefore, of his presence (Mey., De Wet., Blmf.). 
Comp. Ex. 25, 22; 40, 34; Lev. 9, 6; Ezek. 1, 28; 3, 23; 
Heb. 9, 5, etc. #6y points to that sense here. Paul speaks of 
this symbol in Rom. 9,4 as one of the peculiar distinctions with 
which God honored the Hebrew nation. Others (Rosnm., Kuin.) 
resolve the genitive into an adjective — evdogéos. — dvri év rH Mecoro- 
rapia. Abraham resided first in Ur of the Chaldees (Gen. 11, 28), 
which lay probably in the extreme north of Mesopotamia, near the 
sources of the Tigris. Ritter thinks that the name may be traced 
still in Urfa. —é» Xappdy. He migrated to Charran = }3n (Gen. 





* Paulus, Sein Leben und Wirken, seine Briefe und seine Lehre, p- 42. 
t In proof of this, see Hug’s Einleitung in das Neue Testament, Vol. 
II. p. 27 sq., a‘: edition ; and the Biblical Repository, 1832, p. 530. 


\ 
1 


CHAP. VII. 2—4.| NOTES. 101 


11, 31), which was also in the north of Mesopotamia, but south of 
Ur. This place was the later Carre, where Crassus was defeated 
and slain by the Parthians. We have no account of this first call 
of Abraham in the Old Testament, but it is implied distinctly in 
Gen. 15, 7 and Neh. 9,7. Philo and Josephus relate the history 
of Abraham in accordance with the statement here, that he was 
called twice. 

V.3. edbe,x. 7.r. This is quoted from Gen. 12, 1 sq., where 
it appears as the language addressed to Abraham when’ God ap- 
peared to him at Charran. But his earlier call had the same ob- 
ject precisely as the later; and hence Stephen could employ the 
terms of the second communication, in order to characterize the 
import of the first. — dedpo, hither, with an imperative force. — ip 
av, whichever, see on 2, 21. ; 

V.4. ek yijs Xaddaiwov, x. rr. The country of the Chaldees, 
therefore, did not extend so far south as to include Charran; or it 
is not impossible that rére €€eXOdv may belong also to perdxicev, and 
in that case the second removal would have been a part of the 
journey from Chaldea. Compare Gen. 11,31. The early history 
of the Chaldees is too obscure to allow us to define the limits of 
their territory. — pera 1d drobaveiv, x. r. d., after his father was 
dead. According to Gen. 11, 32, Terah died at Haran, at the age 
of two hundred and five. But if Terah was only seventy years 
old at the birth of Abraham (Gen. 11, 26), he could have been but 
one hundred and forty-five years old at the time of his death, since 
Abraham was seventy-five when he left Charran. The readiest 
and best solution of this disagreement is that Abraham was not the 
oldest son, but that Haran, who died before the first migration of 
the family (Gen. 11, 28), was sixty years older than he, and _ that 
Terah, consequently, was one hundred and thirty years old at the 
birth of Abraham. The relation of Abraham to the Hebrew his- 
tory would account for his being named first in the genealogy. We 
have other instances entirely parallel to this. Thus, in Gen. 5, 32, 
and elsewhere, Japheth is mentioned last among the sons of Noah ; 
but, according to Gen. 9, 24 and 10,21, he was the oldest of them. 
Lightfoot has shown that even some of the Jewish writers, who 
can be suspected of no desire to reconcile Stephen with the Old 
Testament, concede that Abraham was the youngest son of Terah. 
The other explanations are less probable. It appears that there 
was a tradition among some of the Jews that Terah relapsed into 


102 NOTES. [CHAP. VII. 4, 5. 


idolatry during the abode at Haran, and that Abraham left him on 
that account, i. e. as the Talmudists express it, after his spiritual 
death. Kuinoel, Olshausen, and others, think that Stephen may 
have used dzoaveiy in that sense; so that the notice of Terah’s 
natural death in Gen. 11, 32 would be proleptic, i. e. in advance 
of the exact order of the history. ‘The tradition of Terah’s re- 
lapse into idolatry may have been well founded. Bengel offers 
this suggestion: “ Abram, dum ‘Thara vixit in Haran, domum 
quodammodo paternam habuit in Haran, in terra Canaan duntaxat 
peregrinum agens; mortuo autem patre, plane in terra Canaan 
domum unice habere coepit.” The Samaritan Codex reads one 
hundred and forty-five in Gen. 11, 32, which would remove the 
difficulty, had it not been altered probably for that very purpose. 
The Samaritan text has no critical authority when opposed to the 
Masoretic.* — pera@xicev, sc. beds, caused him to remove, to migrate 
by a renewed command, see Gen. 12, 1 sq. — «is iv, into which, 
because xaro:keire implies an antecedent motion. 

V.5. kat odk.... ev avrg, and he gave to him no inheritance in 
it, no actual possession, but a promise only that his posterity 
should occupy it at some future period. It is not at variance with 
this that he subsequently purchased the field of Ephron as a burial- 
place, Gen. 23, 3 sq.; for he acquired no right of settlement by 
that purchase, but permission merely to bury “ his dead,” which 
he sought as a favor because he was “ a stranger and a sojourner”’ 
in the land. Lest the passage should seem to conflict with that 
transaction, some (Kuin., Olsh.) would render ov« as ovr, not yet, 
and ¢dexev as pluperfect. De Wette agrees with Meyer in restrict- 
ing the remark to the period of Abraham’s first arrival in Canaan. 
He purchased the field of Ephron near the close of his life. — 
ovdé Biya wodds, not even a foot-breadth, a single foot, Deut. 2, 5. 
—atré.... adrnv, that he would give it to him for a possession, 
not necessarily in his own person, but in that of his descendants. 
The country might be said to be Abraham’s in prospect of that re- 
version. So in Gen. 46, 4, God says to Jacob on his descent into 
Egypt: “I will bring thee up again,” i. e. him in his posterity. 
Others understand xardcyeow of Abraham’s own residence in the 
land of promise. — ovc évros adr@ réxvov, as Well as the general con- 





* See Gesenius de Pentateuchi Samaritani Origine, Indole, et Auctori- 
tate. 


CHAP. VII. 5, 6.] NOTES. 103 


nection, recalls to mind the strength of Abraham’s faith. It was 
in that way that he pleased God and obtained the promise, and not 
by legal observances ; for circumcision had not yet been instituted, 
or the law given. Paul reasons in that manner from Abraham’s 
history, both in Rom. 4, 9 sq. and in Gal. 3, 17 sq. Stephen may 
have expanded his speech at this point so as to have presented dis- 
tinctly the same conclusion; or, as remarked in the first analysis, 
most of his hearers may have been so familiar with the christian 
doctrine on the subject, that they perceived at once that import of 
his allusions. 

V.6. 8é, now, subjoins a fuller account of the promise (De 
Wet.) ; not but, although he was childless (Mey.).— otras, thus, 
to this effect, viz. in Gen. 15, 18-16. The citation has the indi- 
rect form. — dovdecovew, sc. dAddrpioc, involved in év yf dAXorpia ; 
or the subject may be indefinite: — they shall be enslaved. See 
W. § 49. 2. — érn rerpaxdora, four hundred years, in agreement with 
Gen. 15, 13; but both there and here a round number, since in 
Ex. 12, 40 “the sojourning of Israel who dwelt in Egypt” is said 
to have been four hundred and thirty years. But here arises a 
chronological question, to which it is necessary to advert. In Gal. 
3, 17, Paul speaks of the entire period from Abraham’s arrival in 
Canaan until the giving of the law as embracing only four hundred 
and thirty years ; a calculation which allows but two hundred and | 
fifteen years for the sojourn in Egypt ; for Isaac was born twenty- 
five years after that arrival, was sixty years old at the birth of 
Jacob, and Jacob was one hundred and thirty years old when he 
went to reside in Egypt. The Seventy, in Ex. 12, 40, and Jose- 
phus, in Antt. 2. 15. 2, follow the same computation. There are 
two solutions of this difficulty. One is, that the Jews had two 
ways of reckoning this period, which were current at the same 
time ; that it is uncertain which of them is the correct one, and for 
all practical purposes is wholly unimportant, since, when a speaker 
or writer, as in this case of Stephen, adopted this mode or that, he 
was understood not to propound a chronological opinion, but merely 
to employ a familiar designation for the sake of definiteness. The 
other solution is that the four hundred and thirty years in Ex. 12, 
40 embrace the period from Abraham’s immigration into Canaan 
until the departure out of Egypt,and that the sacred writers call 
this the period of sojourn or servitude in Egypt a potiori, i. e. 
from its leading characteristic. They could describe it in this man- 


104 NOTES. [CHAP. VII. 6-14, 


ner with so much the more propriety, because even during the 
rest of the time the condition of the patriarchs was that of exiles 
and wanderers, 

V. 7%. radra refers to xpi, as well as to the other verbs. — kat 
Aarpedoovor .... Tovr@. This clause is taken from a different place, 
viz. Ex. 3, 12. But as the words there also relate to the deliver- 
ance from Egypt, Stephen could use them to express more fully 
the idea in Gen. 15, 16. Adarpedoovo. may intimate that God ac- 
cepted their worship before they had any temple in which to offer 
it: In the communication to Moses, rém@ refers to Sinai or Horeb, 
but is applied here to Canaan. 

V. 8. Svadjxnv reprropijs, i. e. the covenant of which circumcision 
is the sign; comp. onpeioy reprroyjs, Rom. 4, 11.—xat ovrws, and 
thus, 1. e. agreeably to the covenant God gave the promised child, 
and Abraham observed the appointed rite. 

V.9. 6 Oeds per airod may be opposed to (yAdcarres. Here 
was an instance in which he whom the fathers rejected was ap- 
proved of God. 

V. 10. xdpw Kat copiay. He gained the former by means of the 
latter. — xaréornoer, SC. 6 Bapad; comp. 6, 6. — Before drov, x. 7. X., 
repeat yyovpevov. His house means the king’s palace, from which, 
in the East, all the acts of government emanate. In other words, 
Joseph was raised to the office of vizier, or prime minister. 

V. 18. dveyvopic6n, was recognized by them (De Wet.), or 
made himself known to them (Mey., Rob.), The reflexive sense 
agrees best with Gen. 45, 1.— kai gavepdv .... "Iwan, and the race 
of Joseph was made known to Pharaoh, i. e. the fact of their pres- 
ence, their arrival. See Gen. 45,16. It does not mean that the 
king ascertained now Joseph’s Hebrew origin, for he knew that al- 
ready (Gen. 41, 12); nor that Joseph’s brethren were presented to 
him. The introduction took place ata later period ; see Gen. 47, 2. 

V. 14. ev Woxais EBdoujxovra mévre, (consisting) in seventy-five 
souls. For év,see W. § 52.R.e. From so feeble a beginning the 
Hebrews soon grew to a mighty nation; see v. 17. Stephen would 
suggest to the mind that contrast. According to Gen. 46, 27, Ex. 
1, 5, and Deut. 10, 22, Jacob’s family at this time contained seventy 
persons ; but the Septuagint has changed that number in the first 
two passages to seventy-five. In Gen. 46, 26, the Hebrew says 
that Jacob’s descendants, on his arrival in Egypt, were sixty-six, 
and in the next verse adds to these Jacob himself, Joseph, and his 


CHAP. VII. 14—16.] NOTES. 105 


two sons, thus making the number seventy. On the other hand, 
the Septuagint interpolates, in v. 27, viol 5€ "Ioond of yerduevor airo 
év yi Alyinro Woyal évvéa, and adding these nine to the sixty-six in 
v. 26, makes the number seventy-five. It is evident from this in- 
terpolation that the Seventy did not obtain their number by adding 
the five sons of Ephraim and Manasseh (1 Chron. '7, 14-23) to 
the seventy persons mentioned in the Hebrew text. That mode of 
accounting for their computation has frequently been assigned. If 
vioi be taken in its wider sense, those sons and grandsons of Joseph 
may have been among the nine whom they added to the sixty-six, 
but it is not known how they reckoned the other two. They may 
have included some of the third generation, or have referred to 
other sons of Joseph, of whom we have no account. But in what- 
ever way the enumeration arose, its existence in the Greek version 
shows that it was current among the Jews. That it was an errone- 
ous one, is incapable of proof; for we do not know on what data it 
was founded. At all events, Stephen could adapt himself to the pop- 
ular way of speaking with entire truth as to the idea which he meant 
to convey ; for his object was to affirm, not that the family of Jacob, 
when he went down to Egypt, consisted of just seventy-five per- 
sons, in distinction from seventy-six, or seventy, or any other precise 
number, but that it was a mere handful compared with the increase 
which made them in so short a time “as the stars of heaven for 
multitude”; see Deut. 10, 22. That among those whom Joseph is 
said to have called into Egypt were some who were already there, 
or were born at a subsequent period, agrees with Gen. 46, 27; for 
it is said that ‘the sons of Joseph’’ were among “the souls of 
the house of Jacob that came into Egypt”? with him. That repre- 
sentation springs from the Hebrew view, which regarded the de- 
scendants as existing already in their progenitor; comp. Gen. 46, 
15; Heb. 7, 9.10. It is equivalent here to saying, that the mil- 
lions to which Israel had grown on leaving Egypt were all com- 
prised in some seventy-five persons at the commencement of the 
residence there. 

V. 16. It is mentioned in Gen. 50, 18, that Jacob was buried 
in Abraham’s sepulchre, at Hebron (see Gen. 23, 19), and in Josh. 
24, 32, that the bones of Joseph were laid in Jacob’s tomb at She- 
chem, or Sychem; as to the burial of Jacob’s other sons, the Old 
Testament is silent. In this passage, therefore, of marépes quar may 
be taken as the subject of pereréOncav without airés. Such brevity 

14 





106 NOTES. [cHAP. VII. 16. 


was natural in so rapid a sketch, and not obscure where the hearers 
were so familiar with the subject in hand. That Joseph’s brothers 
were buried with him at Sychem rests, doubtless, on a well-known 
tradition in Stephen’s time. ‘¢ According to Josephus (Antt. 2. 8. 2) 
the sons of Jacob were buried at Hebron. According to the 
Rabbins (Light., Wetst.), the Israelites took the bones of their 
fathers with them to Palestine, but say nothing of Sychem ; since, 
however, they do not include the eleven patriarchs among those 
who were buried at Hebron, they probably regarded Sychem as the 
place of their burial.” De Wette., Jerome, who lived near Sychem, 
says that the tombs of the twelve were to be seen there in his time. 
—éy TO pojpart, k. Tt. X., presents a more serious difficulty. It is 
clear from Gen. 33, 19, that Jacob purchased the family tomb at 
Sychem, and from Gen. 23, 1 sq., that Abraham purchased the one 
at Hebron. On the other hand, according to the present text, 
Stephen appears to have confounded the two transactions, represent- 
ing, not Jacob, but Abraham, as having purchased the field at 
Sychem. It is difficult to resist the impression that a single word 
of the present text is wrong, and that we should either omit ’ASpadu 
or exchange it for "Iaxé8.  avjoaro without a subject could be 
taken as impersonal: one purchased = was purchased ; see W. 
§ 49. 2. That change would free the passage from its perplexity. 
It is true, manuscripts concur in the present reading, but this 
may be an instance where the internal evidence countervails the 
external. The error lies in a single word ; and it is quite as likely, 
judging a priori, that the word producing the error escaped from 
some early copyist, as that so glaring an error was committed by 
Stephen ; for, as a Jew, he had been brought up to a knowledge of 
the Scriptures, had proved himself more than a match for the 
learned disputants from the synagogues (6, 10), and is said to have 
been “full of the Holy Spirit ” (6, 5). 

Some attribute the difficulty to the concise, hurried style of the 
narrative. Biscoe states that opinion in the following terms : — 
‘‘The Hebrews, when reciting the history of their forefathers to 
their brethren, do it in the briefest manner, because it was a thing 
well known to them. For which reason they made use of frequent 
ellipses, and gave but hints to bring to their remembrance what 
they aimed at. This may be the case here; and as nothing is 
more easy than to supply the words that are wanting, so, when 
supplied, the narration is exactly agreeable to the history delivered 


—— 


CHAP. VII. 16-19.] NOTES. 107 


in the Old Testament: ‘And were carried into Sychem, and 
were laid,’ i. e. some of them, Jacob at least, ‘in the sepulchre 
that Abraham bought for a sum of money,’ and others of them 
‘in that (bought) from the sons of Emmor, the father of Sychem.’ 
Here we repeat merely kai év r@ (or éxeivm) before mapa rév vidy ; 
which words were easily understood and supplied by those to whom 
Stephen addressed himself.” * Again, some have deemed it suffi- 
cient to say that Stephen was not an inspired teacher, in the strict 
sense of the expression, and that, provided we have a true record of 
the discourse on the part of Luke, we may admit an error in the dis- 
course itself, without discrediting the accuracy of the sacred writers. 
Dr. Davidson thinks that Luke must have been aware of the discrep- 
ancy, and has exhibited his scrupulous regard for the truth by al- 
lowing it to remain, instead of correcting it. Calvin sanctions a 
still freer view: “In nomine Abrahe erratum esse palam est ; 
quare hic locus corrigendus est.” — ’Eypép, Sc. rod marpds ; See on 
B18: 


V. 17-46. The Age of Moses, or the Jews under the Law. 


V.17. «adds, not when, but as, in the degree that. — émayyeNias 
refers to the promise in v. 7. — Instead of éyooer, we should read 
probably apodoynoev (Lachm., Tschdf., Mey.). 

V. 18. ds.... loon, who knew not Joseph, had no regard for 
his memory or services. It has been supposed that a new dynas- 
ty may have ascended the throne at this time. According to Sir 
J. G. Wilkinson,t this “new king” was Amosis, or Ames, first 
of the eighteenth dynasty, or that of the Diospolitans from Thebes. 
Some hold (e. g. Heeren, Jost) that the shepherd kings had just 
been expelled from Egypt, and that the oppressor of the Hebrews 
was the first native prince who reigned after that event. The 
present knowledge of Egyptian history is too imperfect to admit of 
any positive conclusion on such a point. 

V. 19. xaracodirduevos 7d yévos hav, treating subtly our race ; 
see Ex. 1, 10. His policy is characterized in this manner, be- 
cause his object, without being avowed, was to compel the He- 
brews to destroy their children, that they might not grow up to ex- 





* The Acts of the Apostles, confirmed from other Authors, p. 395, ed. 
1840. | 

t Manners and Customs of the Ancient Egyptians, Vol. I. p. 42 sq., 
2d ed. 


108 NOTES. [CHAP. VII. 19-22. 


perience the wretched fate of their parents. — éxdxace, x. rT. ., Op- 
pressed our fathers that they might cast out their infants, in order 
that they might not be preserved alive. Both infinitives are telic, 
and depend on the verbs which they respectively follow. For roo 
moveiv, see on 8,2. The plan of the Egyptians failed; for ‘ the 
more they afflicted the Hebrews, the more they multiplied and 
grew” (Ex. 1, 12); i. e. they spared their children, instead of put- 
ting them to death, and continued to increase. Pharaoh, after this, 
took a more direct course to accomplish his object; he issued a 
decree that all the male children of the Hebrews should be killed 
at birth, or thrown into the Nile ; see Ex. 1,16. 22. The sense is 
different if we make rod woveivy ecbatic: so that they cast out their 
infants, etc. According to this view, the king’s policy was in part 
successful ; the Hebrews exposed their children of their own ac- 
cord. ‘That they did this except as a compulsory act is improba- 
ble, and without any support in the Mosaic account. It is harsh to 
make tov moveiv epexegetical : oppressed them in that they must cast 
out, i.e. in consequence of an edict to that effect. It is difficult 
with this sense to see the force of xaracoducdpevos. 

V. 20. & & xapé, viz. this season of oppression. — doreios ro 
6c6, fair for God, i. e. in his view, who judges truly ; comp. médus 
peyaryn 7 Ged in Jon. 3,3 (Sept.). Itis a form of the Hebrew su- 
perlative. W.% 37. 3. For the dative, see on 5, 34. Josephus 
speaks of the extreme beauty of Moses. See also Heb. 11, 23. 

V. 21. avrév, with the participle, is not an accusative absolute, 
but depends on the verb, and is then repeated ; comp. Mark 9, 28. 
It is changed in some of the best copies to avrov. — dveidaro, took 
up, not from the water or the ark, but like tollere liberos, adopted. 
This use both of the Greek and the Latin word is said to have 
arisen from the practice of infanticide among the ancients. After 
the birth of a child, the father took it up to his bosom, if he meant 
to rear it; otherwise, it was doomed to perish. — eis vidv, as a son, 
in imitation of 7 before that which a person or thing becomes. 
W. § 32. 4. b. 

V. 22. émaided6n maon copia, was educated in all the wisdom ; 
dative of the respect or manner. Some render by the wisdom as 
the means of culture; dative of the instrument (De Wet., Win.). 
The accusative would be the ordinary case after this passive: was 
taught the wisdom ; but it could be interchanged with the dative. 
See W. § 32. 4. — duvards év Adyors. In point of mere fluency, he 


i te i i 


CHAP. VII. 22—30. | NOTES. 109 


was inferior to Aaron (Ex. 4, 10), but excelled him in the higher 
mental attributes on which depends mainly the orator’s power over 
the minds of others. His recorded speeches justify Stephen’s en- 
comium. . 

V. 23. avrg, dative of the agent; see on 5, 9, — reaoapakor- 
raer)s xpovos, a fortieth annual time. See the Note on v. 30.— 
dvéBn emi riv kapdiay = 22-y ny, see Jer. 3, 16. — émioxépacba, 
to visit for their relief, interpose for them. 

V. 24. ddcxodpevor, injured by blows, as stated in the history ; 
see Ex. 2, 11. —ézoincev éxdixnow, wrought redress, succored, 
Luke 18, '7.— sardfas rév Aiyirriv, by smiting the Egyptian 
(who did the wrong) so as to kill him, see v. 28. 

V. 25. évduete, x. r,s On what ground he supposed this, we 
are not informed. He may have thought that his history, so full of 
providential intimations, had pointed him out to his countrymen as 
their predestined deliverer. Stephen interposes the remark evi- 
dently for the purpose of reminding the Jews of their own similar 
conduct in relation to Christ; comp. v. 35. —didecw, gives, i. e. 
would give, or is about to give. The verb is present, because the 
event was near, or viewed as certain. See the grammatical refer- 
ences on 1, 6. : 

V. 26. &6n, appeared, showed himself, with an intimation, per- 
haps, that it was unexpected. — adrois, to them, i. e. two of his 
countrymen (Ex. 2,13). The expression is vague, because the 
facts are supposed to be familiar. — ovyndacer, impelled, exhorted. 
— ipeis after éoré should be left out. — For ivari, see on 4, 25. 

V. 29. év 716 éy@ ToiTo, at this word, which showed that his 
attempt to conceal the murder had failed; see Ex. 2,12. His 
flight was now necessary to save his life; for “when Pharaoh 
heard this thing, he sought to slay Moses.” — év yj Madidu, in the 
land of Madiam, or Midian. ‘“ This would seem,” says Gesenius, 
*‘to have been a tract of country extending from the eastern shore 
of the Elanitic Gulf to the region of Moab on the one hand, and to 
the vicinity of Mount Sinai on the other. The people here were 
nomadic in their habits, and moved often from place to place.” — It 
is common for yj to omit the article before the name of a country ; 
see v. 836; 13,19. W.§ 18. 

V. 30. éraév reocapdkovra. Stephen follows the tradition. It 
was said that Moses lived forty years in Pharaoh’s palace, dwelt forty 
years in Midian, and governed Israel forty years. ‘That he was one 


110 NOTES. [cHAP. VII. 30-34. 


hundred and twenty years old at the time of his death, we read in 
Deut. 34, '7. — 3wa, called Horeb in Ex. 3,1. Of this interchange 
of the names the common explanation has been, that Sinai desig- 
nated a range of mountains, among which Horeb was the particular 
one from which the law was given. Dr. Robinson assigns reasons 
for thinking that Horeb was the general name, and Sinai the specific 
one. See his Bibl. Res., pp. 177, 551. Hengstenberg, Winer, 
Ewald, and others, reject the old opinion. —év @doyi aupds Bdrov, 
in the fiery flame of a bush. svpos supplies the place of an adjec- 
tive ; comp. 9,15; 2 Thess. 1,8. W.§ 34.2. b; S.§ 117.6. 

V.31. xaravojoa, to observe, contemplate, viz. the vision ; see 
v. 32.— der) kupiov. The angel, or messenger, of Jehovah in 
v. 30 (comp. Ex. 3, 2) is here called Jehovah himself. Examples 
of a similar transition from the one name to the other occur often 
in the Old Testament. It has been argued from this usage, as 
well as on other grounds, that the Revealer, under the ancient dis- 
pensation, was identical with the Revealer or Logos of the new dis- 
pensation.* 

V. 32. éya6 beds, x. 7. A. In this way Jehovah declares himself 
to be the true God, in opposition to the idols of the heathen, and 
especially the author of those promises to the patriarchs which 
were now on the eve of being fulfilled. — ovk éréApya karavopom, Sc. 
ro dpapa. In Ex. 3, 6, it is said further, that “ Moses hid his 
face’; an act prompted by his sense of the holiness of Him in 
whose presence he stood ; comp. 1 Kings 19, 13. 

V. 33. dmddnua is a distributive singular, for the plural. W. 
§ 27. 1.—In yf dyia éoriv, Luger finds a special reference to v. 
30, 32. The God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob was present, and 
where he appears the place is holy, though it be in the wilderness. 
It was a mark of reverence in the East to take off the shoes or 
sandals in the presence of a superior, so as not to approach him 
with the dust which would otherwise cleave to the feet. On this 
principle the priests officiated barefoot in the tabernacle and the 
temple. 

V. 34. iddv eiSov = NTA. Truly have I seen. In He- 





* The subject is an interesting one. The reader will find it discussed in 
Smith’s Scripture Testimony to the Messiah, Vol. III. p. 483 sq., and 
in Hengstenberg’s Christology, Vol. I. p. 165 sq. To these may be add- 
ed Kurtz’s supplementary Article, ‘* Der Engel des Herrn,” in Tholuck’s 
Litterarischer Anzeiger, 1846, Nos. 11-14. 


CHAP. VII. 34—38.] NOTES. . 111 — 


brew the infinitive absolute before a finite verb denotes the real- 
ity of the act, or an effect of it in the highest degree; after the 
verb, it denotes a continuance or repetition of the act. See Gesen. 
Heb. Gr. § 128.3; W.§ 46.10. The easier Greek construction for 
this idiom is that noticed on 4, 17. — Some prefer drooreito to 
dmoorek@. The subjunctive aorist could be used as future (W. 
§ 42. 4), but it was adopted here probably from the Septuagint. 

V. 35. rodrov is here emphatic. odros introduces the next three 
verses with the same effect. —pyjcavro. ‘The verb is plural, be- 
cause, though the rejection was one person’s act (v. 27), it revealed 
the spirit of the nation. — dpxyovra kat Avtporyy, as a ruler and 
redeemer ; comp. 5,31. Stephen selects the words evidently with 
reference to the parallel which he would institute between Moses 
and Christ. —év yepi stands for 123 = did; comp. Gal. 3, 19. — 
Bare is feminine also in Luke 20, 37, but masculine in Mark 12, 26. 

V. 36. soujoas we should render performing, or and performed, 
since the participle refers to what was subsequent to e&jyayev, as 
well as to what preceded. ‘After he had showed” (Eng. vers.) 
is inconsistent with the sequel of the sentence. — For the difference 
between répara and onpeia, see on 2, 22.— Lachmann inserts 77 
before yj, but on slight evidence. — Aiyizr@ is more correct than 
Alytirrov. 

V. 37. «podpyrny, x. tr. 4. For the explanation of this prophecy, 
see on 3, 22. No one can doubt that Stephen regarded Christ 
as the prophet announced by Moses ; yet, it will be observed, he 
leaves that unsaid, and relies on the intelligence of his hearers to 
infer his meaning. Here is a clear instance in which the speech 
adjusts itself to those suppressed relations of the subject, on which, | 
as I suppose, its adaptation to the occasion so largely depended. 
By quoting this prediction of Moses, Stephen tells the Jews in ef- 
fect that it was they who were treating the lawgiver with con- 
tempt; for while they made such pretensions to respect for his 
authority, they refused to acknowledge the prophet whom he fore- 
told, and had commanded them to obey. 

V. 38. 6d yevopevos .... Tdv maTépav Nuay, Who was with the angel 
and with our fathers, i. e. communicated with them, acted as 
mediator between God and the people; see Gal. 3,19. This is 
mentioned to show how exalted a service Moses performed, in con- 
trast with the indignity which he experienced at the hands of his 
countrymen. — év rf éxxAnoia, in the assembly, i. e. of the Hebrews 


112 NOTES. [CHAP. VII. 38 — 42. 


congregated at Sinai at the time of the promulgation of the law. — 
(avra characterizes Aoya with reference, not to their effect (comp. 
Rom. 8, 3; Gal. 3,21), but their nature or design: life-giving 
oracles, commands; comp. Rom. 7, 12. The inadequacy of the 
law to impart life does not arise from any inherent defect in the law 
itself, but from the corruption of human nature. - 

V. 39. éorpadnoa .... eis Atyurrov, turned with their hearts 
unto Egypt, i. e. longed for its idolatrous worship, and for the sake 
of it deserted that of Jehovah (Calv., Kuin., De Wet., Mey.). 
The next words are epexegetical, and require this explanation. . 
Some have understood it of their wishing to return to Egypt; but 
that sense, though it could be expressed by the language, not only 
disregards the context, but is opposed to Ex. 32, 4 and Neh. 9, 18. 
The Jews are there represented as worshipping the golden calf for 
having brought them out of Egypt, and not as a means of enabling 
them to return thither. 

V. 40. deods, of mporopedoorra: par is a literal translation of Ex. 
32, 1, where the plural is best explained as pluralis excellentia. 
The Hebrews transferred the name of the true God to the idol 
which they substituted for him as the object of their worship. ‘The 
objection to rendering deovs gods, or idols, is, that Aaron made but 
one calf in compliance with this demand of the people, and that 
in Ex. 82, 8, this single image is called deol, DTI. — 6 yap, x. 7. A. 
obdros is contemptuous, like iste. ‘The nominative absolute, as to 
this Moses, strengthens the sarcasm. W. § 28.3. yap alleges the 
disappearance of Moses as a reason why they should change their 
worship, not, I think, because it freed them from his opposition to 
their desires, but because, whether he had deserted them or had 
perished, it showed that the God whom he professed to serve was 
unworthy of their confidence. 

V. 41. éuoaxoroincay is elsewhere unknown to the extant Greek. 
They selected the figure of a calf as their idol, in imitation, no doubt, 
of the Egyptians, who worshipped an ox at Memphis, called Apis, 
and another at Heliopolis, called Mnevis. Win. Realw. I. p. 644. 
— eddpaivovro refers doubtless to the festive celebration mentioned 
in Ex. 32,6. — rois gpyous is plural, because the idol was the product 
of their joint labors. Meyer supposes it to include the various im- 
plements of sacrifice, in addition to the image. 

V. 42. eorpewe, turned away, withdrew his favor. — rapédoxer, 
gave up (Rom. 1, 24), = clage in 14, 16; he laid for the present no 


CHAP. VII. 42, 43.] NOTES. 113 


check upon their inclinations. In consequence of this desertion 
they sunk into still grosser idolatry. — rj orparia rod odpavod, the 
host of heaven, i. e. the sun, moon, and stars. This form of 
worship is called Sabaism, from 82¥, as applied to the heavenly 
bodies. — év Bi8l@ rév mpopynray, in the book of the prophets, i. e. 
the twelve minor prophets, whom the Jews reckoned as one collec- 
tion. The passage is Amos 5, 25—27.— pi opdyia, x. r.r. This 
sign of a question requires a negative answer, and that answer is 
to be understood in a relative sense. See W.§ 61.3. Did ye 
offer unto me sacrifices and offerings ? i. e. exclusively. The re- 
ply is left to their consciences. Even during the eventful period 
in the wilderness, when the nation saw so much of the power and 
goodness of God, they deserted his worship for that of other gods, 
or, while they professed to serve him, united his service with that of 
idols. ‘The question ends here. 

V. 48. kal dvehdBere, x. tA. The tacit answer precedes: No, 
—ye apostatized, and took up the tabernacle of Moloch, i. e. to 
carry it with them in their marches, or in religious processions. 
This tabernacle was intended, no doubt, to resemble the one conse- 
crated to Jehovah. Stephen follows the Septuagint. Modcy stands 
there for 02342, i. e. the idol worshipped as your king, which was 
the Moloch of the Amorites. The Seventy supply the name of 
the idol as well known from tradition. But there is almost equal 
authority, says Baur,* for reading 0399, Milkom, a proper name. 
That variation would bring the Greek into still closer conformity 
with the Hebrew. — 16 dorpoy rod Oeod, i. e. an image resembling or 
representing a star worshipped by them as a god. — By ‘Peuddy 
the Seventy express {}°2, which, like most of the ancient transla- 
tors, they took to be a proper name. Some of the ablest modern 
scholars defend the correctness of that translation. In this case 
the Greek name must have sprung from a corrupt pronunciation of 
the Hebrew name; see Gesen. Lex. p. 463. According to others, 
1372 should be rendered statue; or statwes, and the idol would then 
be unnamed in the Hebrew. So Gesenius, Robinson, and others. 
Admitting that sense, it was unnecessary for Stephen to correct the 





* Der Prophet Amos erklart, von Dr. Gustav Baur, p. 372. 

+ See especially Movers uber die Phonitzier, Vol. I, p. 289sq. He 
maintains that 1373 may be traced as a proper name in various Oriental 
languages. 


15 


114 NOTES. [CHAP. VII. 43-45. 


current version; for he adduced the passage merely to establish 
the charge of idolatry, not to decide what particular idol was wor- 
shipped. Whether the star-god to which they paid their homage 
was Saturn, Venus, or some other planet, cannot be determined. — 
rods turovs, the figures, in;apposition with oxnyny and dorpov. The 
term was so much the more appropriate to the tabernacle, as it 
contained probably an image of Moloch. — perousd is the Attic 
future. — ééxeiva BaBvAdvos, beyond Babylon, where the Hebrew 
and Septuagint have beyond Damascus. ‘The idea is the same, for 
the prediction turned not upon the name, but the fact, viz. that God 
would scatter them into distant lands. The Babylonian captivity 
was the one best known. 

V. 44. 9) on) rod paprupioy == NIN Onis (Numb. 9, 15; 17, 
23), the tabernacle of the testimony, or law, so called, because it 
contained the ark in which the tables of the decalogue were kept. 
The law is termed a testimony, because it testifies or declares the 
divine will. Bahr’s explanation is different: the tabernacle was a 
testimony or witness of the covenant between God and his people. 
— nowjoa .... éwpdket, viz. on Mount Sinai; see Ex. 25, 9. 40. 
By this reference, Stephen reminds the Jews of the emblematical 
import, consequently the subordinate value, of the ancient worship. 
Moses, under the divine guidance, constructed the earthly tabernacle 
so as to have it image forth certain heavenly or spiritual realities 
that were to be accomplished under “ the better covenant of which 
Jesus is the Mediator.” Here we have the rudiments of the view 
which pervades the Epistle to the Hebrews; see especially Heb. 
8,5. What was true of the tabernacle was true also of the first 
and the second temple ; they were built after the same model, and 
were in like manner dyrirumot, or oxial tdv érovpaviov. ‘That appli- 
cation of the remark could be left to suggest itself. 

V. 45. «ai adds cionyayov to rojo. — diadeEdpevar, having re- 
ceived in succession, viz. from Moses or his contemporaries. A 
new generation had risen up since the departure out of Egypt. — 
pera Incod, with Joshua as their leader, under his guidance. — év 
Th katacxéce tav ebvay, into the possession of the heathen, the ter- 
ritory inhabited by them ; comp. do6nro 4 yn jpiv ev Katacxéoe, In 
Numb. 32, 5.  év (lit. im) shows that the idea of rest predominates 
over that of motion. See W. § 54. 4. Meyer and De Wette 
translate on taking possession of the heathen, on their subjugation. 
The other meaning is better, because it supplies an indirect object 


a 





CHAP. VII. 45—51.] NOTES. i PS 


after eionyayov, and adheres to the prevalent passive sense of xara- 
axéois; see Rob. Lex. s. v.— éws rév jyepdv Aavid belongs to 
eionyayov, employed suggestively ; brought the tabernacle into the 
land, and retained it until (inclusive) the days of David. Some 
join the words with 4» ¢éacev, which exalts a subordinate clause 
above the principal one, and converts the aorist into an imperfect : 

was expelling from Joshua until David. 

V. 46. os .... rod beod. Compare 13,22. The tacit inference 
may be, that, had the temple been so important as the Jews sup- 
posed, God would not have withheld this honor from his servant. — 
atnoaro, asked for himself as a privilege. We have no record of 
this prayer, though it is implied in 2 Sam. '7, 4 sq., and in 1 Chron. 
22, '7. In the latter passage David says: “* As for me, it was in 
my mind to build an house unto the name of the Lord my God.” 
In that frame of spirit he indited the hundred and thirty-second 
Psalm. — eipeiv .... Iax@B8 coincides with Ps. 132, 5. To express 
the object of David’s request, Stephen avails himself of the lan- 
guage contained in that passage. 


V. 47-53. Period of the Temple and the Prophets. 


V. 47. 8, adversative. What was denied to David was granted 
to Solomon; see 2 Chron. 6,77. 8. Yet even the builder of the 
temple acknowledged (2 Chron. 6, 18) that God is not confined to 
any single place of worship. The tenor of the speech would be 
apt to remind the hearers of that admission. 

V.48. GA ody .... Karouwxei. The temple was at length built; 
but was never designed to circumscribe the presence of the infinite 
Architect (see v. 50), or to usurp the homage that belongs to him 
alone. ‘The remark here was aimed, doubtless, at the superstitious 
reverence with which the Jews regarded the temple, and at their 
proneness in general to exalt the forms of religion above its es- 
sence. For ovy in this position, see on 2,7. vacis is probably a 
gloss from 17, 24.—xa6ds, x. 7.r. To give greater effect to his 
reproof,. Stephen ei the testimony of the prophet, viz. Is. 
66, 1. 2. 

V. 51. There is no evidence that Stephen was interrupted at 
this point. Many critics assume that without reason. The sharper 
tone of reprehension to which the speaker rises here belongs to the 
place ; it is an application of the course of remark which precedes. 
We have no right to ascribe it to Stephen’s irritation at perceiving 


116 NOTES. [CHAP. VII. 51—53. 


signs of impatience or rage on the part of his hearers. — drepirpn- 
To .... aot, i. @. destitute of the disposition to hear and love the 
truth, of which their circumcision should have been the sign; 
comp. Ley. 26, 41; Jer. 6, 10; Rom. 2,29. For the dative, see 
2, 37. — tyeis del, x. 7... Ye do always resist the Holy Spirit, 
under whose influence the messengers of God, e. g. Christ and the 
apostles, spoke to them. ‘To reject their testimony was to reject 
that of the Spirit himself. What follows appears to restrict the 
language to that meaning. In its widest scope, the language would 
include also the influence of the Spirit on their own hearts. — xat 
tpeis, also you, where odrws would state the comparison more exact- 
ly. See W. § 57. 

V. 52. riva ray mpopnray, x. t. AX. Stephen would describe the 
general conduct of the Jews towards their prophets; he does not 
affirm that there were no exceptions to it. Other passages, as 
2 Chron. 36, 15.16; Matt. 28, 37, and Luke 13, 33.34, make the 
same representation. — rods mpoxarayyeiAavras, k. T. A., designates the 
prophets with reference to the leading subject of their predictions. 
— rod dixaiov, the Just one (3, 14) slain by them as a malefactor. 
— viv, now, as the climax of the nation’s guilt.— apoddra. See 
3, 13. 

V. 53. oftwes . . .. dyyedor, who received the law by the minis- 
trations of angels, i.e. a law signalized by their agency in its 
communication. ‘The presence of angels at the giving of the law 
is not expressly stated in the Old Testament, but is alluded to in 
Gal. 3, 19, and Heb. 2, 2. Philo and Josephus testify to the same 
tradition. ‘The Seventy translate Deut. 33,2 in such a manner as 
to assert the same fact. It is implied perhaps in Ps. 68, 18.  <is 
may denote upon, i. e. their intervention, through it, see Matt. 12, 
41 (W. § 53. a); or may be taken as the sign of the predicate, 
for, as such; see the Note on v. 21. The Jews regarded this 
angelic mediation as both ennobling the law, and as conferring 
special honor on themselves to whom the law was given. For a 
striking proof of this Jewish feeling, Neander refers to Jos. Antt. 
15. 5. 3. — kal ove epuvddgare, and yet ye have not kept it, not them. 
vopov supplies the object. In this verse, therefore, we have the 
apostle’s idea in Rom. 2, 23: The Jews gloried in the law, while 
they dishonored God by their violations of it. 


CHAP, VII. 54—58.] NOTES. 117 


V. 54-60. The Death of Stephen. 


V. 54. dxovovres shows that they interposed while he was still 
speaking. — For dserpiovro, see on 5, 33. 

V. 55. adnpns mvedparos dyiov. The Spirit revealed to his soul 
that scene in heaven. It was not a vision addressed to the senses. 
— For dd€ay dcod, see on v. 2. — éorara, standing, instead of sitting, 
as at other times. He had risen in order to intimate his readiness to 
protect or sustain his servant (Bng., Kuin., Mey.). It is doubtful 
whether we are to attach that or any other significancy to the par- 
ticular attitude in which he appeared. 

V.56. idod, «x. 7. A. This declaration would tend to exasperate 
them still more. They are now told that He whom they had cru- 
cified, and whom they were ready to slay anew in the person of 
his followers, was exalted to supreme dominion at the right hand 
of God. See the remarks on 2, 34. 

V. 57. xpdavres, crying, among other things, perhaps, that he 
should be silent, or be put to death; comp. 19, 32; Matt. 27, 23; 
John 19, 12.— ovvécxov ra Sra abrav. ‘They affected to regard his 
words as blasphemous, and stopped their ears as an expression of 
their abhorrence. — kal épuncay, x. r.’. Under the Roman laws, 
the Jews had no power to inflict capital punishment without the 
sanction of the procurator or his proxy ; see John 18, 31. Nearly 
all critics, at present, concur in that view. Hence the stoning of 
Stephen was an illegal, tumultuous proceeding. The Roman 
governors connived often at such irregularities, provided the Roman 
interest or power suffered no detriment. As Pilate was deposed in 
A. D. 35, or 36, some have thought that his office may have been 
still vacant (see on 6, 1), and that the Jews took greater liberty on 
that account. 

V. 58. a tijs wédews, because the holy city was not to be de- 
filed with blood ; see Lev. 24, 14. Compare the Note on 14, 19. 
—kat of pdprupes, x. 7... And the witnesses laid off their gar- 
ments, in order to have the freer use of their arms in hurling the 
stones. ‘The law of Moses required the witnesses in the case of a 
capital offence to begin the. work of death; see Deut. 18, 10; 
17,7. The object of the law, it has been suggested, may have 
been to prevent inconsiderate or false testimony. Many would be 
shocked at the idea of shedding blood, who would not scruple to 
gain a private end, or to gratify their malice, by misrepresentation 


118 NOTES. [CHAP, VII. 58 —60. 


and falsehood. —-apa rovs médas, at his feet for safe-keeping. 
Their selecting Saul for this purpose shows that he was already 
known as a decided enemy of the Christians. — veaviov could be 
applied to a person forty years old, but in common speech would be 
apt to restrict itself to a nearer limit, perhaps that of thirty. This 
term, therefore, is very indefinite, as an indication of Saul’s age at 
the time of this occurrence.* 

V.59. émixadotpevoy, calling upon, viz. Christ. No other object 
after this participle is consistent with xvpse "Incod (De Wet., Mey.). 
“That the first Christians called on Jesus,” says De Wette, i. e. 
addressed prayer to him, “is evident from 9, 14. 21; 22,16; 
comp. 2,21; Rom. 10, 12 sq.” See further, on 9, 14.— As the 
dying Saviour said to the Father, * Into thy hands I commend my 
spirit,” so the dying Stephen said now to the Saviour, dea 1d 
TVvEdpLA pLOVv. 

V.60. pi) otnons.... tavrnv, establish not this sin to them, 
reckon or count it not to them (Rob., De Wet.). Christ had set an 
example of this duty, as well as enjoined it by precept. No paral- 
lel to this prayer of Stephen can be found out of christian history. 
The Greeks expressed a dehortatory command or wish by py with 
the subjunctive aorist, when the act was one not yet commenced ; 
comp. on 10,15, ‘This is Hermann’s rule. See Mt. § 511. 3; 
K. § 259. 5. — éxowundn, fell asleep, died; comp. 13, 36; 1 Cor. 
15, 18, etc. Heathen writers employed the verb occasionally in that 
sense ; but its derivative, xouunrypiov, cemetery, i. e. a place where 
the body sleeps in the hope of a resurrection, was first used by 
Christians. It marks the introduction of the more cheerful ideas 
which the gospel has taught men to connect with the grave. 





* Appendix No. I. states what is known or conjectured in regard to the 
early life and training of the Apostle Paul. 


ae ee ee a 


CHAP. VIII. 1-3.] NOTES. 119 


CHAPTER VIII. 


V.1-38. The Burial of Stephen. 


V. 1. The first sentence here would have closed more properly 
the last chapter. — ovvevdoxdy, consenting, approving with them, viz. 
the murderers of Stephen, so that he shared their guilt without par- 
ticipating so directly in the act. In Rom. 1, 32, Paul lays it down 
as one of the worst marks of a depraved mind to applaud thus 
coolly the sins of others, and in 22, 20, he says that he himself 
had exhibited that mark of depravity in relation to the death of 
Stephen. Luke here records probably a confession which he had 
often heard from the lips of the apostle. For jv with the partici- 
ple, see on 1, 10. — ép éxeivy rH qyépa, on that day (comp. 11, 19) ; 
not at that time, which would require the noun to be plural. The 
stoning of Stephen was the signal for an immediate and universal 
persecution. — avres should not be pressed so as to include every 
individual ; see on 3, 18. Many of those who fled returned, doubt- 
less, after the cessation of the present danger. It is not to be sup- 
posed that the church which we find existing at Jerusalem after 
this was made up entirely of new members. — xara ras ydpas, 
x. tA. They fled to these regions first; but some of them (see 
v. 4; 11, 19), probably the foreign Jews, went afterwards to other 
countries. 

V.2. cvverduoar, bore away together (i. e. to the grave), joined 
to bury. — dé, now, carries back the mind to Stephen after the di- 
gression in v. 1 ; not but, in spite of the persecution, for it was not 
only permitted among the Jews, but required, that the bodies of 
those executed should be buried. — dydpes etddaBeis are pious Jews 
(see on 2,5), who testified in this way their commiseration for 
Stephen’s fate, and their conviction of his innocence. The Chris- 
tians would not have been allowed to perform such an office ; they, 
too, would have been designated as disciples or brethren. 

V. 3. | dé, now, presents Saul again as the principal person ; or 
possibly but (Eng. Vers.), contrasting his conduct with that of the 
evAaBeis. — Kata Tods olkovs, from house to house (De Wet.) ; into 
the houses, i. e. of the Christians (Mey.), which agrees better with 
the article. — cipev, dragging, bearing off with violence ; comp. 
14,19; 17,6. Wesee the man’s ferocious spirit in his manner. 


\ 


120 NOTES. [cHAP. VIII. 3-7. 


*‘ Haling,” in the English translation, is an old word for hauling or 
hawling. 


V. 4-8. The Gospel is preached in Samaria. 


V.4. of pev obv Siacrapevres, Those now (11, 19) dispersed, 
taken as a substantive; comp. 1, 6.—6éijAdov, went forth from 
place to place. Luke intimates the circuit of their labors more 
fully in 11, 19. 

V. 5. This is the Philip senficeals in 6,5 and 21, 8; not the 
apostle of that name, for he remained still at Jerusalem, see v. 1. 
— karehov, having come down, because he journeyed from Jerusa- 
lem, v. 15; to go to that city was dvaBaivew.— cis modw rhs Sapa- 
peias, unto the city of Samaria, genitive of apposition (Grot., Kuin., 
Win., Rob.), or a city in that country (Olsh., Neand., De Wet., 
Mey.). That the capital was called Samaria at this time, as well 
as Sebaste, we see from Jos. Antt. 20.6. 2. doduw, with that refer- 
ence, may omit the article because Sayapeias defines it; comp: 
2 Pet. 2,6. W.§ 18.2. It would be most natural to repair at 
once to the chief city, and it was there that such a man as Simon 
Magus (see v. 9) would be most apt to fix his abode. éyAa, in v. 6, 
indicates a populous city. If it was not the capital, it may have been 
Sychar, where the Saviour preached with so much effect (Olsh.) ; 
see John 4, 5 sq.—avrois, unto them. 'The antecedent lies in 
wodw, comp. 18, 11; Matt.4, 23; Gal. 2,2. W. § 65. 7. 

V.6. év 7 dkovew, k. tr. X., when they heard, and saw, etc. év 
with the infinitive denotes here, not the cause, but the time or occa- 
sion. K. § 289. 1. 2. 

V.'7. woddav ydp, x. t.d., For from many who had unclean spir- 
its, they went forth, etc. modddy depends on éé in the verb (Mey., 


De Wet.), comp. 16, 39; Matt. 10,14. Some (Bng., Kuin.) make 


nvevpara the subject of the verb, and supply avira after éyovrav. The 
other is the more natural order. — Bodyra, x. r. X., crying with a 
loud voice, and testifying to the Messiahship of Jesus, or the truth 
of the gospel; comp. Mark 3,11; Luke 4, 41. The expression 
would suppose the reader to be acquainted with the fuller account 
of such cases in the history of Christ. Some understand the cry 
here to have been an exclamation of rage or indignation on the 
part of the demons, because they were compelled to release their 
victims. — moddoi 82, x. t. A. Here, too (see on 5, 16), ordinary 
diseases are distinguished from demoniacal possession. 


Poteet = 
eee 


CHAP. VIII. 9—13.] NOTES. 121 


V.9-18. Simon the Sorcerer, and his Professed Belief. 


V.9. Sivov. For the history of this impostor, his character, 
and the traditions of the church respecting him, the reader is re- 
ferred to Neander’s Church History, Vol. I. p. 454, or his Planting of 
the Church, p. 46 sq. —poimipxev, was there before, i.e. the ar- 
rival of Philip, and had been for a long time, see v. 11. _ 

V. 10. dad puxpod Ews peyddov, from small unto great, i. e. both 
young and old, Heb. 8, 11; Jon. 3,5 (Sept.). The expression has 
been called a Hebraism, but examples of it occur in Greek writers 
(Mey.).— ores, x. r. X., This one is the great power of God, 
i. e. through him is exhibited that power; they supposed him to 
perform wonders which evinced his possession of superhuman gifts. 
The language is similar to that in Rom. 1, 16, where the gospel is 
said to be dvvayis Oeod eis cwrnpiay, i. €. an instrumentality exhibit- 
ing the power of God in the salvation of men. This is the more 
obvious view of the sense, and is the one commonly received. 
Neander would ascribe to the words a theosophic, concrete mean- 
ing. He supposes the Samaritans to have recognized Simon “ as 
more than a man: the Great Power which at first emanated from 
the invisible God, and through which he created every thing else, 
had now appeared in a bodily form on the earth.” It appears to 
be exacting too much from the language to understand it in that 
manner. Aéeyov eivai twa éavtov péyay, in v. 9 (comp. 5, 36; Gal. 
2,6), would not show that he himself carried his pretensions so 
far ; and the people are not likely to have conceded to him more than 
he claimed. — The variation 4 xaAdoupévn peyddn is well supported 
(Grsb., Mey., Tschdf.): which is called great, i. e. is truly so, de- 
serves the epithet. De Wette thinks xadoupévn a gloss, added to 
weaken the idea: called great, but not so in reality. 

V.11. ixave xpdvm, for a long time. ‘The dative stands for the 
ordinary accusative, as in 18, 20; John 2, 20; Rom. 16,25. W. 
§ 31. 5.a; S. § 106. 4. — éLeoraxévau adrovs, had amazed them, lit. 
had put them beside themselves. It was necessary that men de- 
luded to that extent should be reclaimed by arguments addressed to 
the senses; see v. 6, 7, 17. 

V. 13. 6 8€ Sipov, x. 7. X., And Simon also himself believed, 
viz. the word preached, i. e. professed to be a disciple, and was 
baptized in that character. The verb describes him with reference 


to his supposed or apparent state, not his actual position. He may 
16 


122 NOTES. [CHAP. VIII. 13— 18. 


have been not wholly insincere at first, but soon showed that he had 
no correct views of the gospel, that he was a stranger to its power ; 
see on v. 18.— duvdpers differs from onpeia, as explained on 2, 22. 
— Editors hesitate between duvdyers cal onpeia peydda and onpeia Kat 
Suvdpers peyddas. 


V. 14-17. Peter and John are sent to Samaria. 


V. 14. dédexra: has the middle sense. W. § 40. 3. — Sapdpea 
may be the name of the city or the country; see onv.5. The 
application here would not control it there. Neander refers it to 
the country. In that case, as Philip had preached at one place 
only, we must regard the idea as generalized: his success there 
was hailed as the pledge of success in all Samaria. — mpés avrovs, 
unto them in that city, or country ; the antecedent implied, as in v. 5. 

V.15. xaraBavres. ‘Their imparting the Spirit was consequent on 
the journey hither, but is not said to have been the object of it. That 
none but the apostles were empowered to bestow this gift, has been 
affirmed by some, denied by others (see 1 Tim. 4, 14). If it was 
a prerogative of the apostles (who had no successors in the church), 
the inference would be that it ceased with the extinction of that 
order. — mpoonvéavro, x. tA. ‘The Samaritans had received already 
the converting influences of the Spirit; and hence the object of 
the prayer was, that their faith might be confirmed by a miraculous 
attestation ; see on 5, 32. — dzs with the finite verb circumscribes 
the infinitive ; comp. 25, 3; Matt. 8, 34 (De Wet.) ; better here as 
telic, since prayer may be viewed as a necessary condition of the 
gift; comp. v. 24. 

V.17. éeridowy is the imperfect of a repeated act. For the 
import of the symbol, see on 6, 6.— Kal éAdpBavov, x. r.rA. They 
may have received the gift of tongues (see 2,4; 10, 46), and also 
that of prophesy, as well as the power of working miracles. 


V. 18-24. The Hypocrisy of Simon, and its Exposure. 


V. 18. Ocacdpevos (which means to see with interest, or desire) 
has less external support than iw». Meyer retains the former, on the 
principle that the more common word would displace the less com- 
mon, instead of the reverse. The ambition or cupidity of Simon had 
slumbered for a time, but was now aroused at the sudden prospect 
of obtaining a power which would enable him to gratify his selfish 
desires, which would place at his command unbounded wealth and 


a a 


8 ee a, oF 


CHAP. VIII. 18 — 22. | NOTES. 123 


influence. He had seen Philip perform miracles, but had seen no 
instance until now in which that power had been transferred to 
others. ‘The interval between this development of his true charac- 
ter and his profession of the christian faith, was probably not long. 
— mpoonveyxev atrois xpjyara. ‘This act has originated our word 
simony, which Webster defines as “ the crime of buying or selling 
ecclesiastical preferment, or the corrupt presentation of any one to 
an ecclesiastical benefice for money or reward.” 

V.19. xdyoi, to me also, not as well as to others, but that I may 
possess it like you.— éavy, upon whomsoever, see on 2, 21.— 
tavtnv refers to v. 18, not to the clause following. — wa is not de- 
finitive, to wit, that, but telic, in order that. — 

V. 20. 16 dpyipiov, x. r.r., May thy money with thee (— and 
thou) perish. ‘This is the language of strong emotion ; it expresses 
the intense abhorrence which the proposal excited in the mind of 
Peter. That it was not a deliberate wish, or an imprecation, is 
evident from v. 22, where the apostle points out to Simon the way 
to escape the danger announced to him. vv ca some take to 
mean, with thee who art in the way to destruction, i. e. may thy 
money share the doom to which thou art devoted. But the clause 
contains only one verb, and it is violent to make it thus optative 
and declarative at the same time. — For the relation of eis dmodevay 
to ein, see on 7, 21. — dri tiv Sapeay, x. r. r., because thou hast 
thought, imagined it possible (De Wet.), to acquire (not passive, as 
in the English Vers.) the gift of God with money. iy dapedv 
stands opposed to 8:4 ypnydrav cracda, and hence means, that which 
God bestows gratuitously on those who are qualified to receive it; 
not that which it is his prerogative to give in distinction from men. 

V. 21. ode gore .... KAjpos, Thou hast no part nor lot. The 
first term is literal, the second figurative ; they are conjoined in 
order to affirm the exclusion spoken of with more emphasis. — év 
TO Aoy@ Tovr@, in this word, doctrine, or gospel, which we preach 
(Olsh., Neand.), or in this thing, viz. the gift of the Spirit (Bng., 
Mey., De Wet.). The first sense accords better with the usage of 
the word, and is also stronger and more comprehensive ; for if the 
state of his heart was such as to exclude him from the ordinary 
benefits of the gospel, much more must it render him unfit to re- 
ceive the higher communications of the Spirit, or to be honored as 
the medium of conferring them on others. 


V. 22. peruvdnooy .... tavrns occurs in sensu pregnanti for re- 


124 NOTES. [CHAP. VIII. 22 — 24. 


pent, and turn from this thy wickedness ; comp. peravoa amd vexpov 
épyov, in Heb. 6,6. W. § 66. III. d. — For the received dcod after 
de7jOn71, most manuscripts read xvpiov.— ei dpa.... xapdias gov, if 
perhaps the thought of thy heart shall be forgiven thee. Some at- 
tribute the problematical form of the expression to an uncertainty, 
on the part of Peter, whether the man had sincerely repented or 
would repent of his sin, That view assigns the qualifying effect of 
dpa to the first clause, instead of the second, where it stands. Oth- 
ers, more correctly, find the ground of it in the aggravated nature of 
the sin, or in the apostle’s strong sense of its aggravated nature, 
leading him to doubt whether he ought to represent the pardon as 
certain even if he repented. — 7 émivoa, the thought, wicked pur- 
pose, a vox media. 

V. 23. eis yap, x. 7. r., For I see that thou art in the gall of 
bitterness. ‘The gall of noxious reptiles was considered by the 
ancients as the source of their venom; and hence yody, with an 
allusion to that fact, becomes an expressive metaphor to denote the 
malice or moral corruption of the wicked. Compare this with Job 
20, 14; Rom. 3,18. piga mpias, in Heb. 12, 15, is a different 
figure. muxpias describes a quality of xoAyy, and is equivalent to an 
adjective, bitter gall (see on 7, 30) ; so that, transferring the idea 
from the figure to the subject, the expression imports the same as 
malignant, aggravated depravity. — kai oivdeopov adiias, and in 
the bond of iniquity, i. e. not only wicked in principle, but confirmed 
in the habit of sin, bound to it as with a chain. — eis (lit. unto) be- 
longs also to the second clause, and in both cases implies the idea 
of abandonment to the influence or condition spoken of. 

V. 24. SenOyre, x. tr. 4. We may infer from Luke’s silence as 
to the subsequent history of Simon, that the rebuke of the apostle 
alarmed only his fears, that it produced no reformation in his char- 
acter, or his course of life. This conclusion would be still more 
certain, if it were true,«as some maintain, that this Simon was the 
person whom Josephus mentions under the same name as the 
wicked accomplice of the procurator Felix (Antt. 20.7. 2). Nean- 
der held at one time that they were the same, but afterwards re- 
ceded from that opinion. So common a name is no proof of their 
identity, and it is proof against it, that this Simon, according to 
Justin Martyr, belonged to Samaria, while the other is said to have 
been a native of Cyprus. 


ce 


CHAP. VIII. 25, 26.] NOTES. 125 


V. 25-35. Conversion of the Ethiopian. 


V. 25. of pév, viz. Peter and John, unattended by Philip. — 
evnyyedicavro may state the result of their labors while they had 
been absent, or what took place on their return to Jerusalem (Kuin., 
De Wet., Mey.). The latter view agrees best with the order of 
the narrative. This verb, according to a later Grecism (Lob. ad 
Phryn. p. 267), may take its object in the accusative, as well as 
the dative ; comp. v. 40; 14, 15. 21; 16,10; Luke 3,18; Gal. 
1,9. W. $32. 1. | 

V. 26. 98 answers to pév, in v. 25. — éddAnoe,x.7. A. Philip ap- 
pears to have received this direction at Samaria (v. 13), and soon 
after the departure of the apostles. — dvdorn& involves an idiom ex- 
plained in the Note on 9, 18. — wopevov. For the tense, see on 3, 6. 
— xara peonpBpiay, towards the south, points out, not the direction of 
the road from Jerusalem to Gaza, but that in which Philip was to 
travel, in order to find the road. The collocation joins the words 
evidently to the verb, and not, as some have represented, to the 
clause which follows. — Gaza was about sixty miles southwest 
from Jerusalem. — airy éorlv epnuos, This is desert. Some refer 
the pronoun to Téfay, and, as that city was demolished a short time 
before the destruction of Jerusalem, they suppose that Luke by 
épnnos would describe its condition in consequence of that event. 
This is the opinion of Hug, Scholtz, Meyer, and others. But un- 
less Luke wrote the Acts later than A. D. 64 or 65,* this explana- 
tion cannot be correct; for Gaza was not destroyed by the Romans 
till after the commencement of the Jewish war which resulted in 
the overthrow of Jerusalem. Most of the critics who contend fora 
later origin of the book derive their chief argument for it from this 
assumed meaning of gpnyos. But further, even supposing Luke to 
have written just after the destruction of Gaza, it appears improba- 
ble that the novelty merely of the event would lead him to mention 
a circumstance so entirely disconnected with his history. Others re- 
fer avrn to ddov, but differ on the question whether we are to ascribe 
the words to Luke or the angel. According to Bengel, Olshau- 
sen, Winer, De Wette, and others, they form a parenthetic remark 
by Luke, who would give the reader an idea of the region which 
was the scene of so memorable an occurrence. I prefer this opin- 





* See Introduction, § 5. 


126 NOTES. [CHAP. VIII. 26, 27. 


ion. According to others, the words belong to the communication 
of the angel, and were intended to point out to the evangelist the 
particular road on which he would find the eunuch. “This was 
the more necessary,” says Dr. Robinson, ‘* because there were 
several ways leading from Jerusalem to Gaza. The most fre- 


quented at the present day,although the longest, is the way by Ram- , 


leh. Anciently there appear to have been two more direct roads ; 
one down the great Wady es-Surar by Beth-Shemesh, and then 
passing near Tell es-Safieh; the other through Wady el-Musurr to 
Betogabra or Eleutheropolis, and thence to Gaza through a more 
southern tract. Both these roads exist at the present day; and the 
latter now actually passes through the desert; that is, through a 
tract of country without villages, inhabited only by nomadic Arabs.” 
Bibl. Res. II. p. 640. It may be added, that gpnyos, as applied to 
‘“‘ the way,”’ could have this sense also, if we attribute the remark to 
Luke; and he may have inserted the clause for the purpose of in- 
forming the reader to which of the different roads Philip was to 
proceed. It cannot be urged, however, that, if the words were 
‘those of the angel, the relative, pronoun would have introduced 
them instead of airn. See W. § 22. 4. 

V. 27. Aidlop, Ethiopian, may refer to the country where he 
resided (comp. 2, 9), or to his extraction. Hence some suppose 
the eunuch to have been a Jew, who lived in Ethiopia, but most, 
that he was a heathen convert to Judaism. Observe the meaning 
of Aiéiérov in the next clause. It was customary for proselytes, as 
well as foreign Jews, to repair to Jerusalem for worship ; comp. 
20,2; John 12, 20. — evvodxos, a eunuch in the proper import of 
the word; not a minister of state, courtier, to the exclusion of that 
import, because it would then render duvdorns superfluous. The 
latter term, a state officer, is a noun both in form and usage (De 
Wet., Rob.), and is not to be translated as an adjective with edvodyos 
(Kuin., Mey.) — Kavdaxns rijs BaovNioons Aidionwy, Candace, the queen 
of the Ethiopians. Ethiopia was the name of the portion of 


Africa known to the ancients south of Egypt, of which Meroe, a_ 


fertile island formed by two branches of the Nile, constituted an 
important part. Win. Realw. II. p. 439. ‘It is evident both from 
Strabo and Dio that there was a queen named Candace in Ethiopia, 
who fought against the Romans about the twenty-second or twenty- 
third year of the reign of Augustus Cesar. (Dio calls her queen 
of the Aidiomes tmép Aiyinrov oixodyres.) It is clear also from Pliny, 


Ay i 
ere 











CHAP. VIII. 27—30. | NOTES. 127 


who flourished in the reign of the Emperor Vespasian, that there 
was a queen of Ethiopia named Candace in his time; and he adds, 
that this had been the name of their queens now for many years. 
It is beyond all doubt, therefore, that there was a queen of Ethio- 
pia of this name at the time when Philip is said to have converted 
the eunuch. Eusebius tells us that this country continued to be 
governed by women even to his time.” See Biscoe, p. 47. Can- 
dace was the name, not of an individual, but of a dynasty, like 
Pharaoh in Egypt, or Cesar among the Romans. — émi, over, as 
in 12, 20. — apooxvyncwr proves, not that he was a Jew, but that he 
was not a heathen. 

V. 28. dveyivwoxe, was reading, aloud as we see from v. 30, 
and probably the Greek text, not the Hebrew, since the Septuagint - 
was used mostly out of Palestine. It is still a custom among the 
Orientals, when reading privately, to read audibly, although they 
may have no particular intention of being-heard by others.* It was 
common for the Jews to be occupied in this way, especially when 
they were travelling (Schottg. Hor. Heb. II. p. 443).— It is not 
improbable that the eunuch had heard, at Jerusalem, of the death 
of Jesus, and of the wonderful events connected with it, of his 
claim to be the Messiah, and the existence of a numerous party 
who acknowledged him in that character. Hence he may have 
been examining the prophecies at the time that Philip approached 
him, with reference to the question how far they had been accom- 
plished in the history of the person concerning whom such reports 
had reached him. The extraordinary means which God employed 
to bring the AXthiopian to a knowledge of the gospel, and the readi- 
ness with which he embraced it, authorize the belief, that in this 
way, or some other, his mind had been specially prepared for the 
reception of the truth. 

V. 29. KoddyjOntt 7G Gppare roire, attach thyself to this chariot, 
keep near it, follow it. He heard him read for a time unobserved, 
before he addressed him. | . 

V. 30. .dpaye, x. tr. X., Dost thou understand then what thou 
readest 2 ye serves to render the question more definite. The an- 
swer after dpa is more commonly negative; comp. Luke 18, 8. 
Klotz ad Devar. II. p. 180 sq.; W.§ 61. 2. This is given as the 
rule for prose. : 





* See Jowett’s Researches in Syria, p. 443. 


128 NOTES. [CHAP. VIII. 31—34. 


V. 31. as yap, x. tr... For how could I 2 The form of 
the reply attaches itself to the implied negative which precedes. 
— ddnyjon, guide, instruct, similar to John 16, 13. 

V. 32. 4 dé mepioyy, x. r. A., Now the contents (comp. 1 Pet. 
2,6) of the passage (De Wet., Mey.) ; not of the section, division, 
because ypadjjs, being limited by the relative clause, must denote, 
not Scripture, but the particular place which he was reading ; comp. 
v. 35; Luke 4, 21. — jy airy, was this, viz. Is. 53, '7. 8, quoted 
almost verbatim from the Septuagint. — #y6n, was led, sc. NIM 13Y, 
the servant of Jehovah, or the Messiah. — Kat as duos, x. tT. A. 
This comparison represents the uncomplaining submission with 
which the Saviour yielded himself to the power of his enemies. 
The death of Christ was so distinctly foretold in this passage, that 
Bolingbroke was forced to assert that Jesus brought on his own 
crucifixion by a series of preconcerted measures, merely to give 
the disciples who came after him the triumph of an appeal to the 
old prophecies.* 

V. 33. év rH rarewdoe, x. tT. A., admits most readily of this 
sense: In his humiliation, i.e. in the contempt, violence, outrage, 
which he suffered, his judgment was taken away, viz. the judgment 
due to him; he had the rights of justice and humanity withheld 
from him. The Hebrew is Np? vawPD: I¥yR, which yields essen- 
tially the same meaning: Through violence and punishment he 
was taken away, i.e. from life (De Wet.). — rip dé yeveay, x. T.d., 
and his generation who shall fully declare? i. e. set forth the 
wickedness of his contemporaries in their treatment of him (Mey., 
De Wet., Rob.). The Hebrew sustains fully that translation. It 
is possible, also, to render the Greek and the original thus: Who 
shall declare his posterity, the number of his spiritual descendants 
or followers? The prophet in this case points, by an incidental 
remark, from the humiliation of Christ to his subsequent triumph, 
or glorification. Hengstenberg prefers the last meaning.t — ér 

. avrov conforms to the first sense of the clause which precedes, 
better than to the second. 

V. 34. dzoxpibeis, addressing (see 3, 12), or answering in 
further reply to the question in v. 30 (Mey.). The passage from 








* Chalmers, Evidences of Christianity, Chapter VI. 

t For a fuller view of the original passage, the reader is referred to 
Hengstenberg’s Christology, Vol, I. p. 518 sq.; and to Professor Alexander’s 
Commentary on Isaiah. 





= 


CHAP, VIII. 34—37.] NOTES. 129 


Isaiah is cited for the information of the reader, and this verse fol- 
lows historically after v. 31. — epi éavrod, x. r. A. The perplexity 
of the eunuch in regard to the application of the prophecy indi- 
cates that he was a foreigner, rather than a Jew. The great body 
of the Jewish nation understood this portion of Isaiah to be descrip- 
tive of the character and sufferings of the Messiah.* ‘* The later 
Jews,” says Gesenius, “no doubt, relinquished this interpretation, 
in consequence of their controversy with the Christians.” 

V. 35. dvoigas 7 ordua airod is an imperfect Hebraism, i. e. was 
not peculiar to the Hebrew or Hellenistic writers, but most common 
in them. See W.§ 3. It arises from the Oriental fondness for 
the minute, circumstantial. The expression occurs properly before 
important, weighty remarks ; comp. 10, 34; Matt. 5,2; Job 3,1; 
32, 20. —xai dpEduevos ard ris ypadis ravrns is elliptical for and be- 
ginning from this passage, and proceeding thence to others. W. 
§ 66. IL. d. 


V. 36-40. The Baptism of the Eunuch. 


V. 36. xara riv 6ddv, along (5, 15) the way. — éni rt dap, unto 
a certain water ; not some, as the genitive would follow that parti- 
tive sense. C. § 362. 8. —ri codvec, x. tr... What hinders (what 
objection is there) that I should be baptized? ‘This is the modest 
expression of a desire on the part of the eunuch to declare his faith 
in that manner, provided the evangelist was willing to administer 
the ordinance to him; comp. 10,47. As De Wette remarks, the 
question presupposes that Philip, among other things, had instructed 
him in regard to the nature and necessity of baptism, As the road 


on which the eunuch journeyed is unknown, it cannot be ascertained 


where he was baptized. Eusebius and Jerome mention a tradition 
that it occurred at Bethzur, near Hebron, about twenty miles from 
Jerusalem. The tradition, says Winer, may not be incorrect. 
Pococke, who visited Palestine in 1738, thinks that he identified 
both the town and the scene of the baptism. Dr. Robinson decides 
in favor of a more southern road, and would assign the baptism to 
a different place. Bibl. Res. II. p. 641. 

_V. 37. This verse is wanting in the best authorities. The most 
reliable manuscripts and versions testify against it. ‘The few copies 





* See the proofs in Hengstenberg’s Christology, Vol. I, p. 484 sq., and 
Schottgen’s Hore Hebraice, Vol. Il. p. 647 sq. 
17 


130 : NOTES. [cHap. VIII. 37-40. 


that contain the words read them variously. Meyer suggests that’ 
they may have been taken from some baptismal liturgy, and were 
added here that it might not appear as if the eunuch was baptized 
without evidence of his faith. ‘The interpolation is as old certainly 
as the time of Augustine, and perhaps older. — réy vidy rod Oeod is 
the predicate after efva. — 

V. 38. kal éxéXevoe, x. r. ., And he ordered (viz. the chariot- 
eer) that the carriage should stop, lit. stand ; an instructive use of 
the word for 9,'7.. The eunuch’s equipage corresponded with his 
rank. — kal xaréBnoav, x. tr. X., and both went down into the water ; 
not here unto it (which eis may also mean) for it stands opposed to 
éx, in the next verse ; besides, they would have occasion to enter 
the stream, or pool, in order to be baptized into it; comp. éS8amrricOn 
eis rov “lopdavnv, was baptized into the Jordan; in Mark 1,9. See 
Rob. Lex. p. 118. xara in the verb may refer to the descent from 
the higher ground to the water, or to the entrance into the water ; 
but not to the descent from the chariot, for this verb corresponds to 
dyéBnoay in v. 89, they went up, whereas the eunuch only returned 
to the carriage. 

V. 89. éx, out of, some render here from, which confounds it 
with dad. — mvetua, x. t. A., the Spirit of the Lord seized, carried 
away Philip. 'The expression asserts that he left the eunuch sud- 
denly, in obedience to a divine monition, but not that the mode of 
his departure was miraculous. This last certainly is not a neces- 
sary conclusion. — émopevero, x, t. d., for he went his way, returned 
to his country, rejoicing. xaipwy belongs logically to a separate 
clause, but is put here for the sake of brevity. — Tradition says 
that the eunuch’s name was Indich, and that it was he who first 
preached the gospel in Ethiopia. It is certain that Christianity ex- 
isted there at an early period, but its introduction, says Neander, 
cannot be traced to any connection with his labors. 

V. 40. eipedn, x. r. A., not was = jy (Kuin.), but was found at 
(lit. unto) Azotus, i. e. was next heard of there, after the transac- 
tion in the desert. is arises from the idea of the journey thither. 
This place was the ancient Ashdod, now Esdid, an unimportant vil- 
lage. See Rob. Bibl. Res. II. p. 368. — ores does not depend on 
the participle, but on the verb, as in v. 25. The towns referred to 
are Lydda, Joppa, and others, which lay between Azotus and Cesa- 
rea. ‘The latter place was Philip’s home. Here we find him 
again, after the lapse of more than twenty years, when the Saul 


CHAP. VIII. 40—1X. 2.] NOTES. 131 


who was now “breathing menace and murder against the disci- 
ples” was entertained by him as a christian guest; see 21, 8. — 
Luke’s narrative brings us frequently to Cesarea. It was about 
sixty miles northwest from Jerusalem, on the Mediterranean, south 
of Carmel. It was the ancient Srparavos mipyos, which Herod the 
Great had rebuilt and named Cesarea in honor of Augustus. It 
was now the residence of the Roman procurators. Its inhabitants 
were mostly heathen ; the Jewish population was small. 





CHAPTER IX. 


V.1-9. Christ appears to Saul on the Way to Damascus. 


V. 1. 8, dut, turns the attention again to Saul. — ér: connects 
this verse with 8, 3.— éuméav.... hovov, breathing menace and 
murder ; in 26,11, eupavopevos. The figure is founded apparently 
on the fact, that a person under the excitement of strong emotion 
breathes harder and quicker, pants, struggles to give vent to the 
passion of which he is full (Wetst., Kyp., Kuin., Olsh.).  avew 
twos, to breathe of something, to be redolent, is a different expres- 
sion. The genitive in this construction denotes properly that from 
or out of which one breathes, as the cause, source ; the accusative, 
that which one breathes, as the substance, element. See W. § 30. 
9.c; Mt. § 376. Meyer translates éunvéwv, inhaling; but év in 
this compound was generally lost; see Tromm’s Concord. s. v. — 
-7@ dpxtepet. If Saul was converied in A. D. 36, the high-priest 
was Jonathan, the successor of Caiaphas and a son of Ananus, or 
Annas ; but if he was converted in 37 or 38, the high-priest was 
Theophilus, another son of Annas. 

V. 2. émorodds, letters, which were not merely commendatory, 
but armed him with full power to execute his object; see v. 14; 
26, 12. The Jews in every country recognized the Sanhedrim as 
their highest ecclesiastical tribunal. In v. 14 below, and in 26, 10, 
Paul says that he received his authority from the dpycepeis, and in 
22, 5, from the mpeoBurépiov, which are merely different modes 
of designating the Sanhedrim; see on 4, 5. He says here that he 
had his commission from the high-priest ; which harmonizes entire- 
ly with the other passages, since the high-priest represented the 


132 NOTES. [CHAP. Ix. 2—5. 


Sanhedrim in this act. On receiving Saul’s application, he may 
have convened that body, and have been formally instructed to issue 
the letters. The proposal was sufficiently important to engage the 
attention of the entire council. — eis Aayackor states the local desti- 
nation of the letters. This ancient capital of Syria was still an im- 
portant city, and had a large Jewish population. It lay northeast of 
Jerusalem, distant about one hundred and forty. miles, which made 
for those times a journey of six or eight days, — pds ras ovvaywyds, 
unto the synagogues, i. e. the officers of them, who were the dpxe- 
avvayoyos (Luke 8, 49), and the zpecBirepo associated with him 
(Luke 7,3). The former term was sometimes applied to them 
both ; see 18, 15; Mark 5, 22. These rulers formed a college, 
whose province it was, among other duties, to punish those who 
deserted the Jewish faith, De Wet. Heb. Archeol. § 244. 
Hence it belonged to them to discipline those who joined the chris- 
tian party ; or, as it was proposed in this instance, to carry them to 
Jerusalem, to aid Saul in their discovery and apprehension. — ris 
6500, i. e. ar e£oxny, of the (well-known christian) way in regard to 
faith, manner of life, etc.; comp. 19, 9. 28; 22, 4; 24, 14. 22. 
See the idea expressed more fully in 16,17; 18,25. W. § 20. 3. 
6500 depends on évras under the rule of appurtenance, property. 
K. § 273. 2; C. § 387. 

V. 3. év 8 1G mopeverOar, K. Tr. d., Now while he journeyed, it 
came to pass (Hebraistic) that he, etc. — Aayacxg depends on the 
verb (K. § 284. 3. 2); not the dative of the place whither. — 
mepinotpayer avrov pas, a light gleamed around him. ‘The prepo- 
sition in the verb governs airov. In 22, 6, it is repeated, according 
to the rule stated on 3, 2. In 22, 6, Paul says that the light which 
he saw was a powerful light, and in 26, 13, that it exceeded the 
splendor of the sun at noonday. 

V.4. feovoe, x. 7.4. See also 22,7; 26,14. The necessary 
inference is, that Saul heard audible words, and not merely that an 
impression was made upon him as if he heard them. It was a part 
of the miracle that those who accompanied him heard the voice of 
the speaker, but failed to distinguish the words uttered. The com- 
munication was intended for Saul, and was understood, therefore, 
by him only. 

V. 5. ris ef, xipte; Who art thou, Lord? He did not know 
yet that it was Christ who addressed him. Hence xvpse has the 
significance which belongs to it as recognizing the fact, that an 


CHAP. Ix. 5—7.] NOTES. 133 


angel, or perhaps God himself, was now speaking to him from 
heaven. ‘To suppose it used by anticipation, i. e. as denoting him 
who proved to be Christ, makes it Luke’s word, and is unnatural. 
— The remainder of the verse, as it stands in the common text, 
Viz. oxAnpdv .... Aaxrigew, has been transferred to this place from 
26, 14. 

V. 6. Most of the manuscripts begin this verse with add. The 
sentence tpéyov «... moujoa (which the English translation has 
copied) is wanting in the best authorities. It rests chiefly upon 
some of the early versions. The words kat 6 xiptos mpos adrév have 
been derived from 22, 10. — d\\d occurs often before a command 
abruptly given; comp. 10, 20; 26,16. W.{§ 57.4; K.§ 322. 
R. 12. — cat AaAnOjoera,x.7.r. It would appear from 26, 16 - 18, 
that Christ may have made to Saul, at this time, a fuller communi- 
cation than Luke has reported. ‘The verb here does not exclude 
that supposition ; for it may import that, on his arrival in the city, 
he should be confirmed in what he had heard, or instructed further, 
in regard to his future labors. Some prefer to consider Paul’s 
narrative before Agrippa as the abridged account. The message 
which Ananias delivered to Saul was a message from Christ ; and 
as the apostle makes no mention of Ananias in 26, 16 sq., it is 
very possible that he has there, for the sake of brevity, passed over 
the intermediate agency, and referred the words directly to Christ, 
which Christ communicated to him through Ananias. This would 
be merely applying the common maxim, Quod quis per alium 
facit, id ipse fecisse putatur. 

V.7. ciorjkeay évveoi, stood, stopped, speechless, overcome by 
amazement and terror; comp. ¢u@oBo éyévovro, in 22,9. The ad- 
jective is more correctly written éveot. W.§ 5.1. This verb often 
means éo stand, not as opposed to other attitudes, but to be fixed, 
stationary, as opposed to the idea of motion ; comp. 8, 38; Luke 
5, 2. See the Class. Lexx. s. v. In this sense the passage is en- 
tirely consistent with 26, 14, where it is said that when they heard 
the voice they all fell to the ground. Plainly it was not Luke’s 
object to say that they stood erect in distinction from kneeling, lying 
prostrate, and the like ; but that, overpowered by what they saw and 
heard, they were fixed to the spot; they were unable for a time to 
speak or move. The conciliation which some adopt (Bng., Kuin.) 
is that they at first fell to the ground, but afterwards rose up and 
stood. — dkovovres pev tis paras, hearing indeed the voice. ‘The 


134 NOTES. [CHAP. Ix. 7. 


genitive after this verb points out the source or cause of the hear- 
ing ; the accusative (see vy. 4), that which one hears. See the Note 
onv. 1. In 22, 9, Paul says, in reference to the same occurrence, 
thy S€ pavnv ovK #koveay ToD Aadodvrds por, Which we may.render, but 
they understood not the voice of him speaking to me.  dkova, like 
the corresponding word in other languages, means not only to hear, 
but to hear so as to understand. Of the latter’ usage, the New 
Testament furnishes other clear examples. 1 Cor. 14, 2: “ For 
he that speaketh in an unknown tongue, speaketh not unto men, 
but unto God; for no man understands him,” — ovdels yap dover 3 
comp. v. 16, where dxove. passes into oide. Mark 4, 33: ‘ And 
with many such parables spake he the word unto them, as they 
were able to understand it,’—xa6dos 7dvvavro drove. Some 
reckon here John 6, 60; Gal. 4,21, and other passages. For in- 
stances of this sense in the classics, see Rob. Lex. s. v. The 
same usage exists in the Hebrew. One of the definitions of pow 
(see Gesen. Lex. s. vy.) is to understand. In Gen. 42, 23, it is 
said that Joseph’s brethren “‘ knew not that he heard them” (i. e. 
understood, in the Eng. vers.) ; ‘‘ for he spoke unto them by an 
interpreter.” See also Gen. 11,7. The English language has 
the same idiom. We say that a person is not heard, or that we do 
not hear him, when, though we hear his voice, he speaks so low 
or indistinctly that we do not understand him. ‘The intelligence of 
the writer forbids the idea of a palpable contradiction in the two 
passages. Since in 22,9 we have qderqy, and here in v. 7 doris, 
some would attribute to the genitive a partitive sense, i. e. some- 
thing of the voice, or indistinctly. But the difference does not 
hold ; for in 22, 7, Paul says of himself jxovea davis, where he 
cannot mean that he had only a confused perception of what was 
said to him. Some prefer to vary the sense of gdovy, viz. noise or 
sound in this place, but voice in 22, 9. But allowing the word to 
admit of that distinction (see on 2,6), it is much less common than 
the proposed variation in dxovw, and much less probable here, since 
the use of the verb would be varied in passages so remote from 
each other, whereas avy would have different senses in almost 
successive verses. — pndéva S€ Oewpodtyres, but seeing no one who 
could have uttered the voice. ‘This appears to be denied of Saul’s 
companions, in opposition to what was true of him, viz. that simul- 
taneously with the light he had seen a personal manifestation of 
Christ ; comp. v.17; 22, 18. To this fact it is generally supposed 


vs 


lean 5, 


CHAP. IX. 7—12.] NOTES. 135 


that Paul alludes in 1 Cor. 9, 1, where he mentions his having seen 
the risen Saviour as an evidence of his equality with the other 
apostles; see the Note on 1, 3. Neander, De Wette, Meyer, Osi- 
ander, and others, maintain this view. 

V. 8. dvewypévar.... avrod, and when his eyes were opened, i. e. 
his eyelids, which he had spontaneously closed when struck with 
the gleaming light. This expression refers usually to the recovery 
of one’s eyesight, as in Matt. 9, 30; John 9, 10. 20. etc. — ovdéva 
€Bdere, saw no one, i. e. of his companions, because he was blinded ; 
not, as in v. 9, no one from whom the voice came (Bng.). The 
next clause requires this sense. 3 

V.9. jn accompanies Bréerav, where we might expect ov ; comp. 
the other clause. Winer thinks (§ 59. 4) that the denial may be 
opposed to the idea that Saul might have regained his sight before 
the expiration of three days. Meyer says that the negatives are 
interchanged here. 


V. 10-18. Ananias is sent to Saul, and baptizes him. 


V. 10. That Ananias was one of the seventy disciples is an 
unsupported conjecture of some of the older writers. — 6 kupios, i. e. 
Christ, see v. 17. — i8od éy@ — °]3. This answer implies that the 
person hears, and waits to listen further; comp. Gen. 22, 1.7; 
27,1; 1 Sam. 3, 8, etc. ; 

V.11. On dvaords, see v. 18. — pipny, alley, rather than street. 
** This morning,” says Maundrell, ‘* we went to see the street called 
Straight. It is about half a mile in length, running from east to 
west through the city. It being narrow, and the~ houses jutting 
out in several places on both sides, you cannot have a clear pros- 
pect of its length and straightness.” The present name of this 
street may have come down from the age of Paul. — Tapoéa, a na- 
tive of Tarsus (22,3); see on v. 30.— idod yap, x. r.. This is 
mentioned as a reason why he might be sure of a favorable recep- 
tion. 

V. 12. kal cidev, x. r.A., and has seen a man, (made known to 
him in the vision as) Ananias by name. — émbévra avr xeipa, pla- 
cing hand upon him, as a sign of the benefit which he was to be the 
medium of communicating; comp. on 6, 6. The expression is 
indefinite, like that in 12, 1. Lachmann thinks the authority suffi- 
cient to read rds xeipas, as in v. 17.— dvaBdeWn, might see again. 
This sense, out of the New Testament, is not common; an in- 
stance of it occurs at the close of Plut. de sera Num. vindicta. 


136 NOTES. [CHAP. IX. 13—16. 


V. 13. The reply of Ananias shows how fearful a notoriety as 
a persecutor Saul had acquired. Compare 26, 10. — éca kaka, how 
great evils.—rois dyios cov, thy saints, i. e. consecrated to him, 
and so his. This term, as applied in the New Testament, refers to 
the normal or prescribed standard of christian character, rather 
than the actual one. See 1 Cor. 1, 2, as compared with 1 Cor. 
3,23; 11, 21, etc. 

V. 14. eye é€ovciav. Ananias may have received letters from 
the Christians at Jerusalem; or those who came with Saul may 
have divulged the object of the journey since their arrival. — rovs 
émtkaAdoupévous TO dvoua gov, those who call upon, invoke in prayer, 
thy name ; comp. 2, 21; 7,59; 1 Cor. 1, 2. This participle is 
middle, not passive. ‘The Greek for those on whom thy name is 
called would be like thatin 15,17. The expression here is the one 
which the Seventy commonly use to translate DY 87p, a well- 
known formula in the Old Testament signifying to worship. Gese- 
nius (Lex. p. 938) says: To call on the name of God is to invoke 
his name, i. e. to praise, celebrate, worship God. We are to attach 
to it, of course, the same sense in the New Testament. Hence 
this language, which states a fact so characteristic of the first Chris- 
tians that it fixed upon them the name of callers upon Christ, shows 
that they were accustomed to offer to him divine honor. See on 
7, 59. 

V. 15. oxedos éxdoyns, an instrument of choice = a chosen in- 
strument. For this use of the genitive, see on 7, 30. The similar 
examples in Greek belong rather to poetry. It is a common idiom 
in Hebrew. Gesen. Heb. Gr. § 104.— Baciréov. Paul stood as 
a witness for Christ before the governors of Cyprus, Achaia, and 
Judea, and before Herod Agrippa and Nero. — vidv "Iopandk. The 
progress of the narrative will show how faithfully he executed this 
part of his mission. Though he was the great apostle of the Gen- 
tiles, he never ceased to preach to his countrymen. 

V. 16. eye yap, xr. d., For I will show him by experience, 
will cause him to learn in the course of his life (Bng., Mey.). Ac- 
cording to De Wette, it means that God would teach him by reve- 
lation ; but this verb is not employed to denote the communication 
of knowledge in that manner. The statement here confirms the 
declaration that Saul would accomplish so much for the cause of 
Christ ; for (ydp) he was to suffer much, and his labors would be 
efficient in proportion to his sufferings. 


CHAP. 1X. 17—21.] NOTES. 137 


V.17. ceive. The message of Ananias is stated more fully in 
22, 14 sq. — ddedpé, brother, not in a national sense (2, 29; 21,1; 
28, 17), but in the faith of the gospel. He could address Saul 
with confidence by that title, after having received such information 
in regard to the state of his mind, and the sphere of labor to which 
Christ had called him. — "Inaots .... #pxov. Luke’s account of the 
communication to Ananias passes over this part of it. — «at mAn- 
objs, x. t. A, and mayest be filled with the Holy Spirit, i. e. re- 
ceive abundantly the extraordinary gifts and qualifications which he 
would need as an apostle. The expression includes moral endow- 
ments as well as miraculous powers. See the Note on 1, 8. 

V. 18. dmérecov .... doet Aemides, there fell from his eyes as if 
scales ; he experienced a sensation as if such had been the fact. 
eoei Shows that it was so in appearance, not in reality; comp. 2,3; 
6, 15, etc. The nature of the injury which his eyes had suffered 
we cannot determine ; but it is certain that the recovery from the 
injury was instantaneous and complete. We may suppose that 
Luke had often heard Paul relate how he felt at that moment. — 
avacrds, having risen up, and gone forth; comp. Luke 4, 38 (see 
Rob. Lex. s. v. Il. 1. a); or perhaps = having made himself 
ready, i. e. without delay; comp. Luke 15, 18. On this Hebrais- 
tic use of the word, see Gesen. Lex. p. 919; W. § 67. 2.8. It 
is impossible to infer from it that he was baptized on the spot. — 
AaBaov tpopjy, having taken food after the fast of three days, see 
v. 9. 


V. 19-23. The Labors of Paul at Damascus. 


V.19. pera r&v pabnrdv, with the disciples, in private inter- 
course with them. — jyuépas twas, certain days, denotes too brief a 
period to apply to the entire residence at Damascus (Neand., De 
Wet., Mey.). 

V. 20. Kat evdéws, and immediately, after the days spent in the 
society of the Christians there. — éxnpvoce rov “Incoty = éxipvaoce 
rt 6 “Inoots éotw, kK. Tr. A. 3 see on 3, 10. “Incois is the individual or 
personal name of the Saviour; and it was the apostle’s object to 
establish the identity of Jesus with the Son of God, or the a 
Messiah ; comp. v. 22. 

V.21. 6 ropOjcas, who destroyed, put to death; see 22, 3. — 
dvoua todro, viz. that of Jesus, v. 20. The form of the remark 
adapts itself to the narrative. — de, hither, after a verb of motion ; 

18 


138 NOTES. [cHAP. IX. 21-24. 


here in v. 14.— cis rodro anticipates the next clause. — For dpy:epeis, 
see on 4, 6.— The astonishment expressed here proceeded from 
the Jews, whom Paul addressed in the synagogues. Most of the 
Christians at Damascus must have been apprised of the change in 
his character before he appeared in public. 

V. 22. Suidos dé, «x. 7, A., But Saul was more strengthened, i. e. 
in his faith, see 16,5; Rom. 4,20. This remark describes his 
state after the lapse of some time subsequent to his conversion. It 
is made apparently, not merely to indicate his christian progress, 
but to suggest why he preached with such convincing power. — 
ovpBiBalov, x. tT. r., proving that this one is the Christ. otros re- 
calls *Incoty in v. 20 the more readily, because rodro intervenes. in 
vy. 21. 


9 
V. 23-25. The Flight of Paul from Damascus. 


V. 23. as be .... ixavai, Now when many days were accom- 
plished. At this place, probably, we are to insert the journey into 
Arabia, which the apostle mentions in Gal. 1,17. So Neander, 
Hemsen, Meyer, and others. ‘That Luke makes no allusion to this 
journey agrees with the summary character of his history generally, 
in relation to the early portion of Paul’s life. It will be observed, 
he does not say that the “‘ many days” were all spent at Damas- 
cus, but that many had elapsed since his first arrival, before the 
escape which took place under the circumstances narrated. Hence 
the language leaves us at liberty to suppose that he passed more or 
less of the intermediate period elsewhere. ‘The time that Paul 
was absent in Arabia belongs probably to the earlier part of the 
npepar ixavai, rather than the later; for in Gal. 1, 17 he mentions 
Arabia before Damascus, as if the former country was the first 
important scene of his apostleship. The time which he spent in 
Arabia formed not improbably a large part of the three years be- 
fore his return to Jerusalem ; for that supposition explains best the 
fact that he was still so unknown there as a Christian, see v. 26. 
Some critics, as Olshausen, Ebrard, Sepp, would place the excur- 
sion into Arabia between v. 25 and v. 26. The objection to that 
view is, that the apostle must then have come back to Damascus 
(maw iméotpewa eis Aapyackdy, in Gal. 1, 17) in the face of the 
deadly hostility on the part of the Jews which had already driven 
him from that city. 

V. 24. éyvocbn 6 Zavro, became known by Saul, to him. For 


CHAP. IX. 24—27.] NOTES. 139 


the dative after the passive, see on 5,9. The discovery enabled 
the apostle to escapé the danger. — rapernpouv ras ridas, watched the 
gates, i. e. with the aid of soldiers whom Aretas placed at their dis- 
posal,’so that the act of guarding the city could be ascribed to the 
Jews, as in this passage, or to Aretas, as in 2 Cor. 11,32. The 
Jews at this time were influential as well as numerous at Damascus, 
and could easily enlist the government on their side. — dca rod rei- 
xous, through the wall, is defined by d:a éupidos, through a window, 
in 2 Cor. 11, 33, i. e. through an aperture in the wall, or, more 
probably, through the window of a house overhanging the wall. 
Compare Josh. 2,15; 1 Sam. 19, 12. Houses are built in that 
manner, in Eastern countries, at the present day. ‘The traditional 
spot of Paul’s escape is on the south side of the city. 


V. 26-31. Paul returns to Jerusalem, and from there goes to 
Tarsus. 


-V. 26. aapayevopevos. Paul made this journey to Jerusalem in 
A. D. 39. See Introduct. § 6. 1.— koddaoOa, to associate with 
them as one of their own faith. — madvres époBotvro, x. r. A. If Paul 
had spent most of the last three years at Damascus, we should 
suppose that the report of his labors during that time would have 
reached Jerusalem, and prepared the way for his more cordial re- 
ception. On the contrary, if he had been withdrawn for the most 
part from their knowledge, in the more retired region of Arabia, it 
is less surprising that they now regarded him with suspicion. The 
language, according to either view, it will be observed, does not 
affirm that they had never heard of his conversion, but that they 
could not readily persuade themselves that it was sincere. The 
sudden appearance of Voltaire in a circle of Christians, claiming to 
be one of them, would have been something like this return of 
Saul to Jerusalem as a professed disciple. 

V. 27. BapvaBas stood high among the disciples at Jerusalem 
(4, 36; 11,22). Noone out of the circle of the apostles could 
have interposed a more powerful word in behalf of Saul. — dupyy- 
caro, related fully, since they may have heard a report of the oc- 
currence, but had received no definite information concerning it. 
He could add also his own personal testimony to the truth of what 
had come to their ears. — més .... émappnowoaro. He had been 
himself probably a witness of Paul’s zeal at Damascus; and for 
that reason, and because his labors there were more recent, he says 
nothing of the residence in Arabia. 


140 NOTES. [CHAP. Ix. 28-30. 


V. 28. jv per adray, was with them, during fifteen days, see 
Gal. 1, 18. — cioopevipevos kui éxmopevdpevos, i. e. in the exercise of 
his ministry, as results from the next clause; comp. 1, 21. This 
Hebraism denotes properly a public or official manner of life 
(Kuin., Mey.). 

V.29. ampds rods ‘EAAnuatds. See the Note on 6,1. He ad- 
dressed himself to them because he himself was a foreign Jew, and 
was familiar with the Greek, which they also spoke. It has been 
conjectured that one of the festivals may have been in progress at 
this time, and that these Hellenists had come to Jerusalem on that 
account. Compare John 12, 20.— émeyeipow. Note the imper- 
fect. They were not satisfied with a single attempt to take his 
life. 

V. 30. emvyvorres S€ of ddeAhoi, The brethren having ascertained 
it. Paul acted, therefore, in conformity with their advice. We 
learn from 22, 1'7, that another motive concurred with this : he was 
informed in a vision that God would have him occupy a different 
field of labor. Without that revelation he might have thought it 
best to remain, in defiance of the present danger, and notwithstand- 
ing the importunity of his friends; comp. 21, 13. It is a mark of 
truth that we find Luke stating the outward impulse, the apostle the 
inner ground. — In xar7jyayov the preposition marks the descent to 
the sea-coast.— For Caesarea, see on 8, 40.—kal é€amécredar, 
k. Tt A. and they sent him forth to Tarsus. This city was the 
capital of Cilicia, on the river Cydnus. It possessed at this time a 
literary reputation which rivalled that of Athens and Alexandria. 
It had received important political privileges both from Antony and 
Augustus, but did not enjoy the right of Roman citizenship. See 
the Note on 22, 29. — We might conclude from the statement here, 
that Paul went directly to Tarsus by sea. ‘That inference, it has 
been said, contradicts Gal. 1, 21, where, speaking of this journey, 
Paul puts Syria before Cilicia, as if he went to the latter country 
through the former. It is to be noticed that these two countries are 
always named in that order (see 15, 23. 41), and that order agrees 
with the land-route from Jerusalem to Cilicia, which was the one 
more commonly taken. Hence Paul may have adhered to. that 
order in Gal. 1, 21, from the force of association, though in this 
instance he went first to Cilicia, and from there made missionary 
excursions into Syria. But if any one prefers, he can suppose, with 
De Wette, that Paul took ship'at Caesarea, and then landed again at 


CHAP. 1X. 30, 31.] NOTES. | 141 


Seleucia; or with Winer, Rickert, and others, that Syria, in the 
Epistle to the Galatians, included a part of the region between 
Jerusalem and Cesarea. ‘The term had sometimes that wider 
sense. Some have fixed on Cesarea in the north of Palestine as 
the place meant here ; but in that case the epithet which distin- 
guishes the less celebrated city from the other would have been 
added, as in Matt. 16, 13; Mark 8, 27. 

In these regions of Syria and Cilicia, Paul remained about four 
years; see on 11, 26. That he was occupied during this time in 
laboring for the spread of the gospel, is not only to be inferred from 
the character of the man, but is distinctly intimated in Gal. 1, 
21-23. Further, in the sequel of the narrative (15, 23. 41), we 
find churches existing here, the origin of which is unknown, unless 
we suppose that they were planted by Paul’s instrumentality at this 
time. It is not an irrelevant reflection, that during this residence in 
his native land “some of those christian ‘ kinsmen,’ whose names 
are handed down to us (Rom. 16,7. 11. 21), possibly his sister, 
the playmate of his childhood, and his sister’s son, who after- 
wards saved his life (23, 16 sq.), may have been gathered by his 
exertions into the fold of Christ.” The apostle reappears next in 
11, 25. 


V. 31-35. Peter preaches at Lydda, and heals a Paralytic. 


V. 31. ai pev ody, x. r. X., The churches now .... had peace, i. e. 
rest from the persecution which they had suffered since the death 
of Stephen. It had continued for three years; see v. 26. Luke 
does not mention the cause of this respite. As Lardner, De Wette, 
and others suggest, it may have been owing to the troubl¥s excited 
by the order of Caligula, to have his image set up in the temple. 
(Jos. Antt. 18. 8.2-9.) The Jews may have been too much en- 
grossed by their opposition to that measure to pursue the Christians. 
— ovy is here resumptive; comp. 8,4; 11,19; 19, 32. It takes 
up again the main thread of the history after the digression relating 
to Paul: Meyer makes it illative from v. 3-30, as if the peace 
was the result of Paul’s conversion. But as that event occurred so 
soon after the death of Stephen, it leaves too brief an interval for 
the persecution. —Tadaias. This is our only notice of the exist- 
ence of churches in that native land of the apostles. — oixodopovpevat, 
being built up, i.e. in faith and piety; see 1 Cor. 8, 1; 14,4; 
1 Thes. 5, 11, etc. It is contrary to usage to understand it of ex- 


142 NOTES. [CHAP. Ix. 31 —36. 


ternal organization. It does not refer to the increase of numbers, 
since that is the idea of the verb which follows. — ropevépeva: == 
Jon, walking ; a common Hebraism, to denote a course of conduct. 
—16 Pd8o rod kvpiov, in the fear of the Lord, in conformity with 
that state of mind; dative of rule or manner. W. § 31. 3. b.— 
kal TH mapakAnoer Tov dyiov mvedparos, belongs not to mopevopevac, but 
to érAnOivovro, of which it assigns the cause: and by the aid 
(Kuin., Mey., Rob.) of the Holy Spirit were multiplied. That 
sense of wapakAjoe: is not certain. De Wette understands by it 
the power of consolatory discourse conferred by the Spirit; comp. 
4, 36. 

V. 32. Peter may have left Jerusalem soon after the departure 
of Paul; see on v. 27. — dvepydpevov, x. r. A., passing through all 
the believers in that part of the country. Supply here dyiov (Bng., 
Mey., De Wet.), not rémov (Kuin.); comp. 20, 25; Rom. 15, 28. 
The narrative assumes that the gospel had been preached here al- 
ready ; and this was a tour of visitation. — cai, also, includes the 
saints at Lydda among the ravrav. That village, says Dr. Robin- 
son, was ten or twelve miles southeast from Joppa. 

V. 33. His name may indicate that Aineas was a Greek, or 
Hellenistic Jew. He was probably a believer, as faith was usually 
required of those who received the benefits of the gospel. — ef érav 
éxr, since eight years, for so long a time. — xpaBBare, pallet, as 
in 5, 15. 

V. 34. orpécov ceavtd, spread for thyself, i. e. thy bed, not in 
future (Kuin.), but immediately (De Wet., Mey.). Others had per- 
formed that office for him hitherto. He was now to evince his 
restoration by an act which had been the peculiar evidence of his 
infirmity. The object of the verb suggests itself; it is not strictly 
an ellipsis. W. § 66. 7. a. 

V. 35. eiSov airév, saw him after his recovery, whom they had 
known before as a confirmed paralytic. — mdayres may be restricted, 
as suggested on 3, 18.—rdv dpova —= iW, the Plain. It 
extended along the sea-coast from Joppa to Cesarea. Here the 
part nearest to Lydda appears to be meant. Some have thought 
(Win. Realw. IL. p. 383) that Saron may designate here a village 
of that name. — oiriwes éréotpewav, x. tT. A., who, influenced by the 
miracle, turned unto the Lord, see v. 42; not who had turned 
(Kuin.). In the latter case, the import of the remark would be 
that the miracle was a credible one, because it was so well attested. 
Such an apologetic interest is foreign to Luke’s manner. 


\ 


a 


ey ae 


ee eo 


Soe ee ee 


a ee ne eee 


— le 


ee 





er 


SS eS Seer 


CHAP. IX. 36-40. | NOTES. 143 


V. 36-43. Peter visits Joppa. 


V. 36. “Idrmy, northwest from Lydda (see on v. 32), the present 
Japha, or Jaffa. — Tabitha = 80°30 is Chaldee, and means a 
gazelle. We may infer from it her Jewish origin. ‘To her Greek 
friends she may have been known also by the other name. — kal 
éhenuocvvav, and especially alms, deeds of charity ; «ai, explicative. 

V. 37. Xovoarres, x. rT. A., having washed, they placed her in the 
upper chamber of the: house where they were. As the limitation 
suggests itself, the article is omitted. W.§ 18.1. It is inserted, 
v. 39, because there it points back to this place. It was customary 
among the Hebrews for women to perform this rite; but as Luke 
would specify here the act rather than the agency, he employs the 
masculine of the participle, equivalent to the indefinite “ they.” W. 
§ 27. 5. 

V.38. éyyis governs "Iommy as an adverb. The distance was 
mentioned on v. 32. —dzéore:Aav. It is not said that they sent for 
him with any definite expectation of a miracle. It was natural that 
they should desire his presence and sympathy at such a time. 

V. 39. eis rd imepgov. The body was usually kept here when 
for any reason the interment was delayed. See Jahn’s Archeol. 
§ 204; Win. Realw. I. p. 467. They had been waiting in this 
instance for the arrival of Peter. —ai yijpa, the widows, who had 
been the objects of her benevolence, and who now mourned the 
death of their benefactress. Every one must be struck at the 
natural manner in which this beautiful incident. is introduced. — 
doa, k.T.X., not which = 4, but all which, or those which (10, 45) 
she made while she was with them. The idea is not that they ex- 
hibited all the garments which she had made, but that those which 


they exhibited, and which perhaps they wore at the time, were all 


made by her. Observe that the nouns which precede are destitute 
of the article. 

V. 40. ékBarov.... mavras, But having put all forth, caused them 
to retire ; not with violence, see Mark 5,40; John 10,4. The object: 
may have been to secure himself from observation and interruption, 
while he prayed with fervor and agony. Elisha pursued the same 
course, for the same reason probably, when he restored to life the 
Shunamite’s son ; see 2 Kings 4, 33 ; also Matt. 9, 25. — mpoondéaro. 
Peter would address his prayer to Christ; for the apostles wrought 
their miracles in his name ; see v. 34; 3,6. 16; 4, 10. — dvacrnét, 


144 NOTES. [CHAP. IX. 40—X. 1. 


arise, stand erect. Peter speaks as one who felt assured that his 
prayer had prevailed, see Matt. 17, 20. 

V. 42. éyévero draws its subject from the context, viz. the mira- 
cle. — émi rév xipsov, upon the Lord, Christ, whose gospel had been 
so signally attested as true. 

V. 43. Peter remained here many days, because the place was 
large, and the people evinced a preparation for the reception of the 
word. — Bupoei, a tanner. The more scrupulous Jews regarded 
such an occupation as unclean, and avoided those who pursued it. 
The conduct of Peter here shows that he did not carry his preju- 
dices to that extent. 





CHAPTER X. 


V.1-8. The Vision of Cornelius, the Centurion. 


V. 1. ékarovrapyns is often interchanged with éxarovrapyos (21, 
32 ; 22, 25, etc.). The first is the prevalent form in the later 
* Greek. W.§ 8.1. The word has a uniform termination in some 
copies of the text. — omeipns "Irahixjs. Some suppose this cohort to 
have belonged to the legio Jtalica, or Italica prima, of which we 
read in Tacitus (Hist. 1. 59, 64, etc.); but the fact stated by Dio 
Cassius (55. 24) is overlooked, that this legion was raised by Nero, 
and consequently was not in existence at this period of our nar- 
rative. While no ancient writer has left any notice confirming 
Luke’s accuracy in this passage, it so happens that an inscription in 
Gruter * informs us that volunteer Italian cohorts served in Syria, 
i. e. Italian or Roman soldiers, who enlisted of their own accord, 
instead of being obliged to perform military service (see Dict. of 
Antt. art. Velones). It is generally supposed that the Roman 
cohorts, instead of being incorporated always with a particular 
legion, existed often separately. It is probable that such an inde- 
pendent cohort was now stationed at Cesarea, called the Italian, 
because it consisted of native Italians, whereas the other cohorts in 
Palestine were levied for the most part from the country itself. See 





* Copied in Ackerman’s Numismatic Illustrations of the Narrative Por- 
tions of the New Testament, p. 34. 


la es ee. oe a Pe oe 








0 A meat Edad , wy 


CHAP. X. 1—5.] NOTES. 145 


Jos. Antt. 14. 15. 10; Bell. Jud. 1. 17. 1. Compare the Note on 
27,1. It is worthy of remark, as Tholuck* suggests, that Luke 
places this Italian cohort precisely here. Czsarea was the resi- 
dence of the Roman procurator (see on 8, 40); and it was im- 
portant that he should have there a body of troops on whose fidelity 
he could rely. : 

V. 2. edoeBis .... Ocdv. The centurion was, therefore, a 
worshipper of Jehovah ; but the language does not oblige us to 
suppose that he had submitted to circumcision, or had avowed pub- 
licly the Jewish faith. That opinion disagrees with v. 28. 34; 11, 
1.8; 15,7; for those passages show that he was regarded by the 
Jews at this time as belonging still to a heathen community. Cor- 
nelius was one of those men, so numerous in this effete age of 
idolatry, who were yearning for a better worship, and under that im- 
pulse had embraced the pure theism of the Old Testament, so much 
superior to every other form of religion known to them. They at- 
tended the synagogues, heard and read the Scriptures, practised 
some of the Jewish rites, and were in a state of mind predisposing 
them to welcome the gospel of Christ when it was announced to 
them. ‘This class of persons furnished the greater part of the first 
Gentile converts. They appear often in the Acts. —76 Aad, the 
people, viz. of the Jews; comp. v. 42; 26, 17. 23; 28,17. Per- 
haps Luke 7, 5 brings to view one of the ways in which he applied 
his benefactions. 

V. 3. ev épdyart may be understood of an inner or of an outward 
vision (Neand.). — gavepas, distinctly, applies better to a perceptive 
act than to an act of consciousness. «idev is ambiguous in that 


‘respect. — Unless pay stands for dpa (W. § 32. 6), at the ninth 


hour, it denotes the time during which the vision occurred; comp. 
Rev. 3,3. éwdrnv was one of the Jewish hours of prayer (3, 1.) 
V.4. riéors; What is it which is designed or desired ? — For 
kvpte, See the remark on 9,5. — dvé8yoav is appropriate to mpocevyat, 
but applies only per zeugma to édXenuooiva. In v. 31 the nouns 
have different verbs. — eis pynydovvor, for a memorial, as such (see 
on 7, 21), i. e. he was now to receive evidence of his being remem- 
bered, masmuch as God was about to open a way for his attain- 
ment of the peace of mind which he had so anxiously sought. 
V.5. Joppa was about thirty miles south of Caesarea. — perd- 





* Die Glaubwardigkeit der Evangelischen Geschichte, p, 174. 
19 


146 NOTES. [CHAP. x. 5-10. 


meprya is middle, because he was to execute the act through the 
agency of others. K. § 250. R.2; B. § 185. 8.—Sipova.... 
Tlérpos. Both names are given, so as to prevent mistake as to the 
individual whom they were to find. ‘This, too, is the reason for 
describing so minutely his place of abode. 

V.6. apa Oddraccav, by the sea-shore, viz. that of the Mediter- 
ranean. Luke states a fact here; the ground of it we learn from 
other sources. The sanatory laws of the ancients, it is said, re- 
quired tanners to live out of the city ; “non solum ob mortua ani- 
malia, quorum usum ipsa eorum opifi¢ii ratio efflagitabat, sed etiam 
ob feetidos in eorum officinis et edibus odores et sordes.”* ‘The 
convenient prosecution of their business required that they should 
be near the water. — ofros AaAnoe: cou Ti ce Sei roveiv, at the close of 
this verse, in the common text, was inserted in conformity with 
9,6; 10, 32. 

V.'7. ds dé dzidOev, x. 7. A. He despatched the messengers, 
therefore, on the same day, although it was so far advanced (v. 3) ; 
comp. eéavrfjs in v. 33. —6 Aadév must be taken as imperfect ; 
comp. John 9, 8 (De Wet.).— rév mpocxaprepoiyray avre, of those 
(sc. soldiers) who waited upon him, who stood ready to perform 
those personal services which he might require. Kuinoel’s idea is 
that they acted as a house-sentry. — «day accords with the descrip- 
tion of the centurion’s family in v. 2. 


V. 9-16. The Vision of Peter. 


V.9. 1H éravpiov, on the morrow, after their departure from 
Ceesarea. — él rd Séua, upon the house, the roof of it, which, ac- 
cording to the Oriental manner, was flat, or but slightly inclined. 
It was the place often chosen for the performance of religious du- 
ties. Jahn’s Archeeol. § 34. 

V. 10. sxpécmevos occurs only here. The law of analogy shows 
it to be intensive, very hungry. — #Ocde yetoacbau, desired to eat; 
not would have eaten. — rapackevagovrwy Sé éxeivav, While they now 
(not but) were preparing, i.e. for the evening repast; see v. 9. 
The pronoun refers to those in the family where Peter was enter- 
tained. — ékoracis —= év wvevpari (Rev. 1, 10), i. e. a trance, or rap- 
ture, whereby (if we may so express it) he was transported out of 
himself, and put into a mental state in which he could discern ob- 





* Walch, Dissertationes in Acta Apostolorum, Vol. I. p. 125, 3d ed. 


nS 


md 


CHAP. X. 10-15. ] NOTES. 147 


jects beyond the apprehension of man’s natural powers. See 
11,5; 22, 17.—JIn the mode of instruction which God employed 
in this instance, he adapted himself to the peculiar circumstances in 
which Peter was placed. ‘ The divine light that was making its 
way to his spirit revealed itself in the mirror of sensible images, 
which proceeded from the existing state of his bodily frame.” 
(Neand.) . 

V. 11. oxedds m1, a certain vessel, receptacle, which as dddynv 
peyadnv describes more definitely as a great sheet. —récoapow.... 
yis, bound at four corners, i. e. with cords, and (thus) let down 
upon the earth. 'This is the common view, and, I think, the correct 
one. Meyer understands dpyais of the four corners of heaven, i. e. 
east, west, north, and south, to which the cords suspending the 
sheet were fastened. Neander inclines to that interpretation. — 
Lachmann expunges dedepévov xai, after A, B, C, and some other 
authorities ; but probably the omission of the words in 11, 5 led to 
their omission here. ; 

V. 12. mdvyra ra rerpdroda, all the quadrupeds, i. e. as to their 
varieties, not individually. See W. § 17. 10. b. — The text here is | 
confused. ris yjs is to be retained, no doubt, but should follow 
éprera (Lachm., Mey., Tschdf.).— kai ra @npia before Kai ra éprera 
is not found in the controlling manuscripts. It is evident that the 
text in 11, 6 has influenced the text in this passage. 

V. 13. dvaords. See on 9, 18. Yet Peter may have been 
kneeling, or reclining; at that moment (Mey.). — Oicov kai ¢ddye, 
slay and eat, i.e. any one of the creatures exhibited to him, with- 
out regard to the distinetion of clean or unclean. 

V. 14. sav, preceded by the negative, is a Hebraism for ovdeév ; 
comp. Matt. 24, 22; Rom. 3,20; Eph. 5,5. The two modes of 
expression present the idea from different points of view. That of 
the Hebrews excepts every thing from the action of the verb ; that 
of the Greeks subjects nothing to it. Gesen. Heb. Gr. § 149.1; 
W. § 26. 1.—xowsr is the opposite of &y:ov, common, unholy. As 
this sense was unusual, the more explicit dxaaprov follows. . 

V.15. 4 6 beds éxabdpice, What God has cleansed, i. e. declared 
by this symbolic act to be clean. Verbs in Hebrew have often this 
declarative sense ; comp. Lev. 13, 3. 8. 13; 16, 30; Ezek. 43, 3; 
Jer. 1, 10, etc. See Gesen. Heb. Lex. s. 773. An approximating 
usage exists in Greek. — od pz) koivov, call not thou common. a is 
contrasted with 6eds. It is not usual to insert the first or second per- 


148 NOTES. [CHAP. X. 15~22. 


sonal pronoun as the subject of a verb, unless it be emphatic. K. 
§ 302. 1; B.§ 129. 14. The imperative is present because he 
was committing the prohibited act at the time. Compare the Note 
on 7, 60. 

V.16. odro refers to the repetition of the voice, not to the 
vision as seen three times. ‘Those who understand it in the latter 
way overlook wa\w éx Sevrépov just before. The command was 
reiterated, in order to impress the words more deeply on the mind 
of Peter. 


V.17-23. The Messengers arrive at Joppa. 


V.17. Sinroper, was perplexed, uncertain. — ri dy ein, what it 
might be, signify; comp. Luke 8,9; John 10,6. He must have 
been convinced that such a revelation was not designed merely to 
announce the abolition of a ceremonial custom; but it was not yet 
evident to him how much the principle comprehended, and espe- 
cially in what practical manner he was to exhibit his liberation from 
the scruples by which he had been bound hitherto. — 6 cide, which 
he had seen; comp. on 1, 2. — kai idov, then behold, as in 1, 10.— 
dvepwrnoavres, a strengthened sense, having inquired out,— emt rov 
mvurava, at the gate, which opened directly into the house or court ; 
not the porch, vestibule, since the more splendid houses only had 
that appendage ; comp. Matt. 26, 71 (De Wet.). 

V. 18. qevjoartes, sc. ria (see v. 7), or, less definitely, having 
called, announced their presence. — ei fevifera, if he lodges. 'The 
present tense turns the question into a direct form. W. § 42. 4. 

V.19. SiervOvpovpevov is stronger than évOvpoupevov in the com- 
mon text: earnestly considering. ‘The first is the better attested 
word, — rpeis after dvdpes should be omitted. It was added from 
v. Ys 21,14, 

V. 20. adda, but, turns the discourse to a new point; comp. 
9, 6. — pndev Siaxpwopevos, making no scruple, i. e. to go with them, 
although they are heathen. — éy = amvedya in v. 19. 

V. 21. rods dmeoradpevovs dd rod KopymXiov mpos adrov defines 
aySpas ; and since, in the public reading of the Scriptures, a new 
section began here, the words were necessary in order to suggest 
the connection. This accounts for our finding them in a few 
copies. ‘The preponderant testimony is against them. 

V. 22. paprvpoipevos occurs, as in 6, 3.— éxpnyaticbn, was di- 
vinely instructed ; comp. Matt. 2, 12. In the classics this word 


¢ 





CHAP. X. 22-26. | NOTES. 149 


refers to a communication made in reply to a question ; but in the 
New Testament and the Septuagint it drops that relative sense. — 
pypara, words, instruction ; comp. AdAjoe: oor in v. 32. The first 
account of the vision (v. 4 sq.) omits this particular. 


V. 28-383. Peter proceeds to Caesarea. 


V. 23. ri émaipiov, on the morrow after the arrival of the mes- 
sengers. — tues rav adeApdv. ‘They are the six men mentioned in 
11, 12. We are not informed of their object in accompanying the 
apostle. ‘They may have gone as his personal friends merely, or 
from a natural desire to know the result of so extraordinary a sum- 
mons. In his defence before the church at Jerusalem (see 11,1 
sq.), Peter appealed to these brethren to confirm his statements. 
Some have conjectured that he may have foreseen the necessity of 
that justification, and took-the precaution to secure the presence of 
those who would be acknowledged as impartial Jewish witnesses. 

V. 24. 1H ematpwr, on the morrow after leaving Joppa. They 
occupied a part of two days in the journey. — For eis repeated in the 
verb and before the noun, see on 3, 2. — robs dvayxaious didovs, his 
intimate friends. 'The classical writers combine the words with 
that meaning (Kypk., Wetst.). | 

V. 25. as dé, x. 7. A., Now as it came to pass that Peter was 
entering, Cornelius having met him, viz. at the door, or in the court 
of the house. The first interview appears to have taken place 
there, and then the centurion and the apostle proceeded to the room 
where the company was assembled; see v. 27.— émi rods médas, 
upon the feet, viz. of Peter, which he may have embraced at the 
same time ; comp. Matt. 28, 9. — mpocexivycer, reverenced, viz. by 
prostrating himself in the Oriental manner. Since Cornelius ac- 
knowledged Jehovah as the true God, and must have regarded him 
as the only proper object of worship, it is difficult to believe that he 
intended this as an.act of religious homage. The description of his 
character in v. 2 and v. 22 cannot be easily reconciled with the 
imputation of such a design. See more on the next verse. 

V. 26. adrdv yee, raised him up, caused him to rise by the 
command addressed to him. — kéy avrés, «. r. X., I also myself am 
aman, as well as you. Peter may have been surprised at such a 
mode of salutation from a Roman, whose national habits were so 
different ; he had reason to fear that the centurion had mistaken his 
character, was exceeding the proper limits of the respect due from 


150 NOTES. [CHAP. x, 26-28. 


one man to another; he recoiled at the idea of the possibility of 
having a homage tendered to him, which might partake of the rey- 
erence that belongs only to God, In other words, it is more prob- 
able that Peter, in his concern for the divine honor, warned the 
centurion against an act which he apprehended, than. that the cen- 
turion committed an act so inconsistent with his religious faith. 
That inconsistency is so much the less to be admitted, because 
Peter had just been represented in the vision so distinctly as a man. 
The apostles claimed no ability to know the hearts .or thoughts of 
men, except as their actions revealed them. Compare with this 
conduct of Peter that of Paul and Barnabas at Lystra (14, 14 sq.). 
The Saviour, on the contrary, never repressed the disposition of his 
disciples to think highly of his rank and character. He never re- 
minded them of the equality of his nature with their own, or inti- 
mated that the honor paid to him was excessive. He received their 
homage, whatever the form in which they offered it, however excited 
the state of mind which prompted it. This different procedure on 
the part of Christ we can ascribe only to his consciousness of a 
claim to be acknowledged as divine. 

V. 27. cvvomrdv avrg, conversing with him (Whl., Rob.).  Ac- 
companying him may be a more exact etymological sense, but is 
less appropriate. 

V. 28. énicracbe, ye know well; see on 19, 15.— ds, how, or 
= én, that. See W. § 57. 5.— abéurov, unlawful. The Jews 
professed to ground this view on the laws of Moses; but they could 
adduce no express command for it, or just construction of any com- 
mand, in the Old ‘Testament. — xod\AdoOa, x. r. X., to associate with 
(5, 15), or come unto, one of another nation. The second verb 
evolves the sense of the first. — ad\AopvA@ is applied to the Philis- 
tines in 1 Sam. 13, 3=5 (Sept.), and to the Greeks in 1 Macc. 4, 12. 
It has been said that Luke has betrayed here an ignorance of Jew- 
ish customs ; since the Jews, though they refused to eat with the 
uncircumcised (Gal. 2, 12), did not avoid all intercourse with 
them. But the objection presses the language to an extreme. We 
are to limit such general expressions by the occasion and the nature 
of the subject. The intercourse with the Gentiles, represented here 
as so repugnant to Jewish ideas, was such intercourse as had now 
taken place ; it was to enter the houses of the heathen, partake free- 
ly of their hospitality, recognize their social equality. In accordance 
with this, we find coAAdoOa exchanged for cvvédayes, in 11, 33; the 


CHAP. X. 28— 30. | NOTES. 151 


word there may be supposed to define the word here. De Wette 
objects that the act of eating has not been mentioned ; but it is not 
mentioned anywhere, and yet the subsequent accusation against 
the apostle alleges it as the main offence. The act was, doubt- 
less, a repeated one ; see y. 48. An instance of it may have pre- 
ceded the utterance of the words here in question. Nothing would 
be more natural, at the close of such a journey, than that the travel- 
lers should be supplied with the means of refreshment before enter- 
ing formally on the object of the visit. Considered in this light, 
Peter’s declaration in this verse agrees entirely with that of Jose- 
phus (Cont. Ap. 2. 28) : “* Those foreigners (dAAopvAcr) who come 
to us without submitting to our laws, Moses permitted not to have 
any intimate connections with us”; see also Ib. 2. 36. Compare 
John 18, 28. — kal gol, x. r. X., and (in opposition to that Jewish 
feeling) God has shown me, etc. ; not but (Eng. vers.). 

V. 29. 8d kal, x. tr. A., Therefore I also came, i. e. he was not 
only instructed, but obeyed the instruction. «ai connects #\fov with 
dere. — dvarrippntos = avapdiBdres, without delay (Heysch.). It 
is a later Greek word. — rin Adyo, with what reason, for what ob- 
ject; dative of the ground or motive. W.§ 31.3. b. Peter was 
already apprised that Cornelius had sent for him in consequence of 
a revelation, but would desire naturally to hear a fuller statement 
of the circumstances from the centurion himself. The recital may 
have been necessary, also, for the information of those who had 
assembled. 

V. 30. dd rerdptns npépas, x. t. X., has received different ex- 
planations. 1. From the fourth day (prior to the vision) unto this 

hour, i. e. unto an hour corresponding to that which was then pass- 
ing, viz. the ninth (Hnr., Neand., De Wet.). According to this 
view, Cornelius had been fasting four days at the time of the an- 
gel’s appearance to him. 2 From the fourth day (reckoned back- 
ward from the present) unto this hour I was fasting, i.e. he had 
kept a fast of four days, up to that time, having seen the angel on 
the first.of them (Mey.). That sense would seem to require the 
present or perfect ; #uyv represents the fast as having terminated, 
and so would exclude ravrns ris Spas. 3. Four days ago I was 
fasting unto this hour, i. e. he had seen the vision at the ninth 
hour on the fourth day from that on which he was then speaking, 
How long the fast had continued before that event is left undecided 
(Bng., Kuin,, Olsh., Eng, vers.). This yiew agrees with the num- 


152 NOTES, [cHar. x. 30-35. 


ber of days which had elapsed since the angel’s communication 
(viz. four; see v. 7, 9, 28, 24); but it is not proved that dro can 
mean ago = mpo (see 1 Cor. 2,7; 2 Cor. 12,2). 4. Some explain 
four days ago from the morning until the ninth hour ; which employs 
the preposition as before, and renders yyorevovy almost unmeaning. 
— #unv is an imperfect middle, rare out of the later Greek. W. 
§ 14.2. b; B. § 108. IV. 2.— Spar is like the accusative in v. 3. 
— dvijp év éobjrt Kapmpa = ayyedoy rod Oeod inv. 8. See 1, 11. 

V. 31. 4 mpooevyn refers more especially to his prayer at this 
time. But the answer to this prayer was,an answer to his other 
prayers, since the burden of them had doubtless been, that God 
would lead him to a clearer knowledge of the truth, and enable 
him to attain the repose of mind which a conscience enlightened, 
but not yet “¢ purged from a sense of evil,” made it impossible for 
him to enjoy. Hence mpogevyai in v. 4 could be exchanged here 
for the singular. 

V. 32. wéupov ov, Send, therefore, because in this way he 
would obtain the evidence that he was approved. — peraxd\eoa eX- 
emplifies the usage of the middle noticed on v. 5. 

V. 33. efavris agrees with the narrative in v. 7. — xadés émoin- 
gas, thou hast done well ; a common phrase expressive of the grati- 
fication which a person derives from the act of another (Wetst., 
Raph.). For the construction, comp. Phil. 4, 14.— évamoy rod 
Geov, in the sight of God, with a consciousness of his presence ; 
and hence prepared to hear and obey his message. ‘This is a rea- 
son why Peter should speak with freedom and confidence. ‘ Terra 
bona; inde fructus celerrimus.” (Bng.) 


V. 84-43. The Address of Peter. 


V. 34. See the remark on dvoifas rd ordpa in 8, 35. — rpocwmo- 
Aynmrns is a word coined to express concretely the idea of 0°19 Nv): 
respecter of persons, i. e. here partial in the way of regarding one 
man as better than another, on the ground of national descent. 

V.35. Sexris adira éor, is acceptable to him, i.e. his righteousness, 
his obedience to the divine will, as far as it extends, is as fully ap- 
proved of God, though he be a Gentile, as if he were a Jew. It is 
evident from karadapBdvouat, that 6 oBovpevos adrov Kal epyatopevos 
dixacootvvyny describes the centurion’s character before his acceptance 
of the gospel, and, consequently, that dexrds adré applies to him as a 
person still destitute of faith in Christ. ‘That Peter did not intend, 


rr ert 


— 


CHAP. X. 35, 36.] NOTES. 153 


however, to represent his righteousness, or that of any man, prior 
to the exercise of such faith, as sufficient to justify him in the sight 
of God, is self-evident ; for in v. 48 he declares that it is neces- 
sary to believe on Christ, in order to obtain “‘the remission of 
sins”; comp. also 15, 11. The antithetic structure of the sen- 
tence indicates the meaning. 6 goBovpevos, x. r.d., is the opposite 
of otk mpogwmoAnmrns, i.e. God judges man impartially ; he ap- 
proves of what is excellent, in those of one nation as much as in 
those of another; he will confer the blessings of his grace as 
readily upon the Gentile who desires to receive them, as upon the 
Jew. In other words, since the apostle has reference to the state of 
mind which God requires as preparatory to an interest in the bene- 
fits of the gospel, the righteousness and the acceptance of which he 
speaks must also be preparatory, i. e. relative, and not absolute.* 
V. 36. The construction is uncertain, but the most simple is 
that which makes Adyov depend on oiSare, in apposition with pijya: 
The word which he sent....(I say) ye know the thing that was 
done, etc. So essentially, Kuinoel, Meyer, Winer, and others. 
See W. § 64. I. 1. Others refer Adyov to what precedes, and sup- 
ply «ard, or take the accusative as absolute: the word (viz. that 
God is thus impartial) which he sent, etc. (Bng., Olsh., De Wet.). 
That mode of characterizing the contents or message of the gospel 
is unusual. ‘The structure of the sentence is no smoother in this 
case than in the other. A recent writer? has proposed to construe 
evayyeifouevos as a predicate of 6 poBovpevos,x. 7. d.: he that fears 
God is acceptable to him... . having announced (to him) as glad 
tidings, peace, etc. But the participle in this position cannot be 
separated without violence from the subject of dméoreide, nor is the 
accusative in any other instance retained after this verb in the pas- 
sive ; comp. Matt. 11,5; Heb. 4,2. The construction would be 
correct in principle, but is not exemplified. — dréoreuXe, sent, i. e. 
first, as in 3, 26; 13,26. That priority Peter concedes to the 
Jews. — eipyyny, peace, reconciliation to God procured through 
Christ ; comp. Rom. 5, 1. 10; not union between Jews and Gen- 
tiles (De Wet.), an effect of the gospel too subordinate to be made 
so prominent in this connection. The apostle restates the idea in 





* Neander’s remarks on this passage, in his Planting of the Christian 
Church, deserve attention ; see the close of the first Section or Book. 
t In the Theologische Studien und Kritiken, 1850, p. 402 sq. 
20 


154 NOTES. [CHAP. xX. 36 — 39. 


v. 43. — odros.... KUpios. mdvrwy is masculine, not neuter. Peter 
interposes the remark as proof of the universality of this plan of 
reconciliation. ‘The dominion of Christ extends over those of one 
nation, as well as of another; they are all the creatures of his 
power and care, and may all avail themselves of the provisions of 
his grace. Compare Rom. 3, 29. 30; 10, 12. 

V. 37. otdare, x. r. X., implies that they had already some knowl- 
edge of the life and works of Christ. The fame of his miracles 
may have extended to Cesarea (see Matt. 15,21; Mark 7, 24) ; 
or Philip, who resided there (8, 40), may have begun to excite pub- 
lic attention as a preacher of the gospel. Some think that Corne- 
lius was the centurion who was present at the crucifixion of Christ 
(Matt. 27,54; Mark 15, 39; Luke 23, 47), since it was customary 
to march a portion of the troops at Ceesarea to Jerusalem, for the 
preservation of order during the festivals. It is impossible to re- 
fute or confirm that opinion. Peter proceeds to communicate to 
them a fuller account of the Saviour’s history, and of the nature 
and terms of his salvation. — pjza — Adyov in v. 36 (Kuin., Mey.) ; 
or thing (De Wet.), which is more congruous with yevdyevoy, and 
associates the word with the indubitable facts on which it rested. 
— pera rd Bdrriopa, i. e. after the completion of John’s ministry. 
See on 1, 22. The Saviour performed some public acts at an 
earlier period, but did not enter fully on his work till John had fin- 
ished his preparatory mission. 

V. 38. ‘Incody transfers the mind from the gospel-history to the 
personal subject of it. The appositional construction is kept up 
still. — amd Na¢aper, from Nazareth, as the place of his residence ; 
see Matt. 2, 23. — as %ypicev, x. 7. A. See the Note on 1,2, and on 
4, 26. Svvdyer is defined by what follows as power to perform 
miracles. — d:jdev, went from place to place ; comp. 8, 4. — idpe- 
vos, k. t. X. His triumph over this form of Satanic agency is singled 
out as the highest exhibition of his wonder-working power. 

V. 39. éovev supplies the correct word after jets, but is not 
genuine. — rf xépa rev “Iqvdaiwv includes not only Judea, but Gali- 
lee, and the region which the Jews occupied on the east of the Jor- 
dan. — év xai, whom also, an additional fact in the Saviour’s history 
(De Wet.) ; whom even, climacteric (Mey.). Winer (§ 66. 3. h) 
assumes a brachylogy: whom (of which also we are witnesses) 
they slew, etc. This is too complicated. — xpeudoarres, by hanging. 
K. § 312. 4. e. — Eddov. See on 5, 30. 


CHAP. X. 40-42. ] NOTES. 155 


V. 40. daxev .... yevérOa, caused him to become manifest 
(Mey., De Wet.) ; not granted it as a favor (Str.). 

V. 41. 16 dad, the people, i. e. of the Jews ; comp. on v. 2. — 
GANG pdprvot, K. T. r., but unto witnesses before appointed by God. 
The choice of the apostles is ascribed indifferently to Him, or to 
Christ (1,2). apé in the participle represents the selection as made 
before Christ rose from the dead; not as purposed indefinitely be- 
fore its execution. The exception here made to the publicity of 
the Saviour’s appearance accords with the narrative of the Evan- 
gelists ; they mention no instance in which he showed himself to 
any except his personal followers. Paley founds the following 
just remarks on that representation of the sacred writers. ‘‘’ The 
history of the resurrection would have come to us with more ad- 
vantage, if they had related that Jesus had appeared to his foes as 
well as his friends; or even if they had asserted the public appear- 
ance of Christ in general unqualified terms, without noticing, as 
they have done, the presence of his disciples on each occasion, and 
noticing it in such a manner as to lead their readers to suppose that 
none but disciples were present. If their point had been to have 
their story believed, whether true or false ; or if they had been dis- 
posed to present their testimony, either as personal witnesses or as 
historians, in such a manner as to render it.as specious and unob- 
jectionable as they could; in a word, if they had thought of any 
thing but the truth of the case as they understood and believed it, — 
they would, in their account of Christ’s several appearances after 
his resurrection, at least have omitted this restriction. At this dis- 
tance of time, the account, as we have it, is perhaps more credible 
- than it would have been the other way ; because this manifestation 
of the historian’s candor is of more advantage to their testimony 
than the difference in the circumstances of the account would have 
been to the nature of the evidence. But this is an effect which the 
Evangelists could not foresee; and is one which by no means 
would have followed at the time when they wrote.” — oirwes.... 
airg. - See Luke 24, 43; John 21, 13. Hence they testified to a 
fact which they had been able to verify by the most palpable evi- 
dence. Compare the Note on 1, 3.— pera rd dvacrivat avrov éx 
vexpav belongs to the clause which immediately precedes. It was 
after his resurrection that they had this intercourse with him. The 
punctuation of some editors refers the words incorrectly to v. 40. 

V. 42. 1@ dag, as above. Peter alludes to the sphere of their 





156 NOTES. [CHAP. x, 42-45. 


ministry which they were directed to occupy first; comp. 1, 8; 
3, 26, etc. — drt adrds, that himself and no other. W. § 22. 4. R. 
— Kpitis Covrer Kal vexpav, judge of the living and dead, i. e. of all 
who shall be on the earth at the time of his final appearance 
(1 Thess. 4, 17), and of all who have lived previously and died. 
For other passages which represent Christ as sustaining this office 
of universal judge, see 17,31; 2 Tim. 4,1; 1 Pet. 4, 5. Ols- 
hausen and some others, understand the living and dead to be the 
righteous and wicked ; but we are to attach to the words that figura- 
tive sense only when the context (Matt. 8,22), or some explanatory 
adjunct (Eph. 2, 1), leads the mind distinctly to it. 

V. 43. roir@ .... paprupotow, For this one (dat.comm.) testify 
all the prophets ; comp. on 3, 24. — deo .+.. els avroy states the 
purport of their testimony. ‘This clause presents two ideas : first, 
that the condition of pardon is faith in Christ; and secondly, that 
this condition brings the attainment of pardon within the reach of 
all; every one, whether Jew or Gentile, who believes on him shall 
receive remission of sins. See Rom. 10,11. For the explanation 
of rod dvoparos advrod, see on 2, 21. 


V. 44-48. Cornelius and others receive the Spirit, and are 
baptized. 


V. 44. ru Aadodvros. Hence he had not finished his remarks 
when God vouchsafed this token of his favor; see 11, 15.— +o 
mvedpa, i. e. as the author of the gifts mentioned in v. 46. The 
miracle proved that the plan of salvation which Peter announced 
was the divine plan, and that the faith which secured its blessings 
to the Jew was sufficient to secure them to the Gentile. A previ- 
ous submission to the rites of Judaism was shown to be unneces- 
sary. It is worthy of note, too, that those who received the Spirit 
in this instance had not been baptized (comp. 19, 5), nor had the 
hands of an apostle been laid upon them (comp. 8,17). This 
was an occasion when men were to be taught by an impressive ex- 
ample how little their acceptance with God depends on external ob- 
servances, —dyras restricts itself to the Gentiles (v. 27) since 
they were properly the hearers to whom Peter was speaking, and 
not the Jews. 

V. 45. of &x mepiropijs, the circumcised, i. e. the Jewish brethren, 
mentioned in v. 23; comp. 11, 2; Rom. 4, 12; Col. 4, 11.— 
mistol = muorevoyres ; see 16, 1; John 20, 27.. * Verbal adjectives 


CHAP. X. 45— XI. 2.] NOTES. 157 


in ros, which have usually a passive signification, have often in 
poetry, and sometimes in prose, an active signification.” * — ére kui, 
that also, as well as upon the Jews. — émt ra em, upon the Gen- 
tiles, since this single instance established the principle. 

V. 46. yAdooas, with tongues new, before unspoken by them. 
The fuller description in 2, 4 isk aig the way for the conciser 
statement here. 

V. 47. pare rd Dap, x. r. X., Can perhaps any one forbid water 
that these should not be baptized? The import of the question is 
this: Since, although uncircumcised, they have believed and re- 
ceived so visible a token of their acceptance with God, what should 
hinder their admission into the church? Who can object to their 
being baptized, and thus acknowledged as Christians in full con- 
nection with us? As xcwAve involves a negative idea, wn could be 
omitted or inserted before Bamric6qvau. The distinction may be, 
that the infinitive with yy expresses the result of the hinderance ; 
without 7, that which the hinderance would prevent.t jn after such 
verbs has been said to be superfluous (K. § 318. 10), or simply 
intensive (Mt. § 534. 3). — cai qyeis, also we, viz. év dpyq, in 11, 15. 

V.48. smpocéra€e, commanded that the rite should be performed 
by others; he devolved the service on his attendants. Peter’s rule 
in regard to the administration of baptism may have been similar to 
that of Paul; see 1 Cor. 1, 14. — émpeivu, sc. én’ adrois ; comp. 
28, 14. 





CHAPTER XL 


V. 1-18. Peter justifies himself at Jerusalem for his visit to 
Cornelius. 


V.1. xara tiv “Iovdaiav, throughout Judea, comp. 15, 23 (Mey., 
Win.), not card = év (De Wet.). W. § 53. d.—ra em, the 
heathen while still uncircumcised. 

V.2,. dre dvéByn. There is no evidence that Peter was sum- 
moned to Jerusalem to defend his conduct. He had reason to fear 





* Kuhner, Ausfthrliche Grammatik, § 409. 3. A. 1. 
t See Woolsey’s Notes on the Alcestis of Euripides, v. 11, 


158 NOTES. [CHAP. XI. 2-15. 


that it would be censured until the particulars of the transaction 
were known, and he may have hastened his return, in order to 
furnish that information. — of é« mepuroujs are the Jewish believers, 
as in 10, 45; not here a party among them more tenacious of cir- 
cumcision than the others. It is implied that this tenacity was a 
Jewish characteristic. ‘The narrower sense of the expression oc- 
curs in some places. 

V. 3. See the remarks on 10,28. Notice the ground of the 
complaint. It was not that Peter had preached to the heathen, but 
that he had associated with them in such a manner as to violate his 
supposed obligations as a Jew. Compare the Note on 2,39. We 
may infer that he had avoided that degree of intimacy when he 
himself entertained the Gentile messengers (10, 23). 

V.4. dp&duevos, x. r. X., commencing, i. e. proceeding to speak, 
he expounded unto them, etc.; comp. Matt. 11, 73; 26, 22, etc. 

V.5. For the omission of 77 before mde, see on 8, 5. — dpapya 
denotes here what was seen, and differs from its use in 10, 3.— 
réscapow apxais kabiepevnv, let down, suspended, at four corners, 
i. e. by means of cords fastened to them. Luke abbreviates here 
the fuller expression in 10, 11. 

V. 12. By a mixed construction, daxpwopevoy agrees with the 
suppressed subject of ovveddeiv, instead of po. C. § 627. B.; Mt. 
§ 536. — of é& ddeAgot obror, these six men (see 10, 23) ; they had, 
therefore, accompanied Peter to Jerusalem, either as witnesses for 
him, or for their own vindication, since they had committed the 
same offence. 

V. 13.  rdv adyyedov, the angel known to the reader from the pre- 
vious narrative (10, 3. 22). Those addressed had not heard of the 
vision, and must have received from Peter a fuller account of it 
than it was necessary to repeat here. — dvdpas has been transferred 
to this place from 10, 5. 

V. 14. «was 6 oixos. The assurance embraces them because 
they were prepared, as well as Cornelius, to welcome the apostle’s 
message ; comp. 10,2. This part of the communication has not 
been mentioned before. 

V. 15. a&péacOa is not superfluous (Kuin.), but shows how soon 
the Spirit descended after he began to speak ; see on 10,44. W. 
§ 67. 4.— ev dpyf, at the beginning, i. e. on the day of Pentecost. 
The order of the narrative indicates that the conversion of Corne- 
lius took place near the time of Paul’s arrival at Antioch. Some 


CHAP. XI. 15—19.] NOTES. 159 


ten years, therefore (see on v. 26), had passed away since the 
event to which Peter alludes ; comp. on 15, 7. 

V.16. éurmoOnv, x. tr. ., And I remembered the declaration of 
ihe Lord, i. e. had it brought to mind with a new sense of its mean- 
ing and application; comp. Matt. 26, 75; John 12, 16. The 
Saviour had promised to bestow on his disciples a higher baptism 
than that of water (see 1,5; Luke 24, 49); and the result proved 
that he designed to extend the benefit of that promise to the heathen 
who should believe on him, as well as to the Jews. 

V. 17. ‘nai, also, connects jpiv with avrois. — morevoaow refers to 
both pronouns (De Wet., Mey.), i. e. they all received the same 
gift in the same character, viz. that of believers. — éya de ris juny, 
x. t. X., combines two questions (W. § 63.7.) : Who then was I? 
Was I able to withstand God ? i. e. to disregard so distinct an inti- 
mation of his will that the heathen should be recognized as worthy 
of all the privileges of the gospel, without demanding of them any 
other qualification than faith in Christ. dvvarés suggests that such 
opposition would have been as presumptuous and futile, as a con- 
test between man’s power and infinite power. 6¢ with ris strength- 
ens the question, as in 2 Cor. 6, 14. 

V. 18. javxacay, were silent, refrained from further opposition 
(v. 2) ; comp. 21, 14. — éddgafoy expresses a continued act. The 
sudden change of tenses led some to write éddéacav. — dpaye, there- 
fore, then (Matt. 7,20; 17, 26); more pertinent here than the 
interrogative dpdye (8, 30). The accentuation varies in different 
editions. — For ri perdvoay eSaxey, see the Note on 5, 31. —cis 
(anv, ecbatic, unto life, i. e. such repentance as secures it ; comp. 
2 Cor. 7, 10. 


V. 19-24. The Gospel is preached at Antioch. 


V. 19. of pev ody d:acmapevres recalls the reader to an earlier event 
in the history ; see 8, 4. — amd rijs Odivews, in consequence of the per- 
secution, lit. from, viz. the effect of it (Whl., Win., Mey.) ; comp. 
20,9;.Luke 19,3. This is better than to render dz since. It is 
more natural to be reminded here of the cause of the dispersion, 
than of the time when it began. —ém 3repdvo, upon Stephen, on 
his account; comp. 4, 21; Luke 2, 20. W. § 52. c. — d:prOov. 
See 8, 4. 40.—owixns. Phenicia lay along the Mediterranean, 
extending from the river Eleutherus on the north to Ceelo-Syria 
and Judea on the south (Win.). Among its cities were Tyre and 


160 NOTES. [CHAP. XI, 19 — 22. 


Sidon ; and the statement here accounts for the existence of the 
Christians in those places, mentioned so abruptly in 21, 4; 27, 3. 
— Avrioxeias. Here we have the first notice of this important city. 
Antioch was the capital of Syria, and the residence of the Roman 
proconsuls for that province. It was founded by Seleucus Nicator, 
and named after his father, Antiochus. It stood “near the abrupt 
angle formed by the coasts of Syria and Asia Minor, and in the 
opening where the Orontes passes between the ranges of Lebanon 
and Taurus. By its harbor of Seleucia it was in communication 
with all the trade of the Mediterranean; and, through the open 
country behind Lebanon, it was conveniently approached by the 
caravans from Mesopotamia and Arabia. It was almost an Oriental 
Rome, in which all the forms of the civilized life of the empire 
found a representative.” * See further, on 18, 4. It is memorable 
in the first christian age as the seat of missionary operations for 
the evangelization of the heathen. 

V. 20. 8, but, distinguishes the course pursued by certain of 
them, from that of the other d:aomapevres. The general fact is first 
stated, and then the exception. — Kumpuou, i. e. Jews born in Cyprus ; 
see 2, 5. 9.— pds rods “EAAnvas, unto the Greeks, opposed to 
*Iovdaiors in the foregoing verse. ‘The received text has ‘EAAnuords, 
Hellenists (see on 6, 1), but the external evidence for the other word 
concurs sufficiently with the internal to justify its adoption (Grsb., 
Lachm., T’schdf., De Wet.). It would have been nothing new to 
have preached, at this time, to the Greek-speaking Jews; see, e. g. 
2, 9.— Kupnvaio. See on 2, 10. 

V. 21. For xelp xvpiov, comp. 4, 30; Luke 1, 66. — per adray, 
with them who preached at Antioch. The subject of discourse, 
both in the last verse and the next, requires this reference of the 
pronoun. } . | 

V. 22. jKxovobn eis ra Sra is a Hebraism, says De Wette, with- 
out any instance exactly parallel in Hebrew. — 6 doyos, the report. 
mept avrav excludes the idea that it was a communication sent from 





* The Life and Letters of St. Paul, edited by the Rev. W. J. Cony- 
beare and the Rev, J. 8S. Howson, London, 1850, I am indebted to this 
able work for most of the geographical information relating to the Apostle 
Paul’s first missionary tour. The first volume only has yet been published. 
It is to be hoped that an undertaking, commenced with so much success, 
will be prosecuted to its close, 


CHAP. XI. 22-26. ] NOTES. 161 


the brethren at Antioch. — ééaméoreiday derives its subject from év 
‘Tepocodvpors ; comp. Gal. 2, 2. — BapydBav. See 4, 36; 9, 27. 

V. 23. xdpw rod bcod, the grace, or favor of God, as manifested 
in the conversion of the heathen. — rayras, all who had believed. 
— 7h mpobéce tijs kapdias, with the purpose of the heart, i.e. a pur- 
pose sincere, earnest. 

V. 24. dre jv, x. r. X., states why he exerted himself so strenu- 
ously to establish the converts in their faith. éfaméore:Aay in v. 22 
is too remote to allow this to be the reason why they selected him 
for such a service. — kal mpoceré6n, x. tr. A. The labors of Barnabas 
resulted also in the accession of new believers. 


V. 25, 26. Paul arrives at Antioch, and labors there. 


V. 25. Our last_notice of Paul was in 9, 30. — dvafnrica, in 
order to seek out, find by inquiry or effort. It was not known at 
what precise point the apostle was laboring; see Gal. 1,21. “It 
was an eventful day when Barnabas, having come across the sea 
from Seleucia, or round by the defiles of Mount Amanus, suddenly 
appeared in the streets of Tarsus. The last time the two friends 
met was in Jerusalem. In the period since that interview, ‘ God 
had granted to the Gentiles repentance unto life’ (v.18). Barnabas 
had ‘seen the grace of God’ (v. 23), and under his own teaching 
‘a great multitude’ (v. 24) had been ‘added to the Lord.’ But he 
needed assistance ; he.needed the presence of one whose wisdom 
was greater than his own, whose zeal was an example to all, and 
whose peculiar mission had been miraculously declared. Saul 
recognized the voice of God in the words of Barnabas; and the 
two friends travelled in all haste to the Syrian metropolis.” Life 
and Letters of Paul, p. 128. 

V. 26. émnavrdv Srov, a whole year, viz. that of 44, since it 
was the year which preceded Paul’s second journey to Jerusalem; 
see the Note on 12, 25. Hence, as the apostle went to Tarsus about 
the beginning of 40 (see on 9, 30), the years which he spent in 
Syria and Cilicia were those between 40 and 44. — cuvay6jva, 
k. T. d., that they were assembled, met together, in the church, the 
public congregation, i. e. for the purpose of worship, and, as we see 
from the next clause, for the ministration of the word: and they 
taught a great multitude ; comp. 14, 21. — ypnyariom .... Xpioria- 
vows, and the disciples were first named Christians at Antioch. 
“‘Thus a new term entered into the vocabulary of the human 

21 


162 NOTES. [oHAP. x1. 26-28. 


race’; but it is uncertain who introduced it. Xpiorvavoi has a Lat- 
in termination, like ‘HpwS:avoi, in Matt. 22, 16; Mark 3, 6; we see 
the proper Greek form in Nafwpaios in 2, 22, or *Iradixds in 10, 1. 
Hence some infer (Olsh., Mey.) that it must have been the Roman. 
inhabitants of the city, not the Greeks, who invented the name. 
The argument is not decisive, since Latinisms were not unknown 
to the Greek of this period. It is evident that the Jews did not ap- 
ply it first to the disciples ; for they would not have admitted the 
implication of the term, viz. that Jesus was the Messiah. It is 
improbable that the Christians themselves assumed it; such an 
origin would be inconsistent with its infrequent use in the New 
Testament. It occurs only in 26, 28; 1 Pet. 4,16, and in both 
places proceeds from those out of the church. The xaddv évopa rd 
emuxdnbev ep tpas in James 2, 7 may be the Christian name. The 
believers at Antioch had become numerous ; they consisted of Gen- 
tiles and Jews; it was evident that they were a distinct community 
from the latter; and probably the heathen, whether they were 
Greeks or Romans, or native Syrians, needing a new appellation 
for the new sect, called them Christians, because the name of Christ 
was so prominent in their doctrine, conversation, and worship. 
The term may not have been at first opprobrious, but distinctive 
merely. 


V. 27-380. Barnabas and Saul are sent with Alms to Jerusalem. 


V. 27. ev ravras tais nuépas, i. e. about the time that Paul him- 
self came to Antioch ; for it is reasonable to suppose that an inter- 
val of some extent occurred between the prediction and the famine. 
— npopnra, inspired teachers; see on 2, 17. Agabus, at least, 
possessed the prophetic gift, in the strict sense of that expression. 

V.28. dvacras, having stood up, in order to declare his message 
more formally. —”Ayafos is known only from this passage and 21, 
10. — éonpave, made known (see 25, 27), not intimated merely. — 
Auwdv, in the later Greek, is masculine or feminine; hence some 
copies have peyay, others peyddnv. See W. § 8. 2. 4.— pedrew 
éceoOac contains a double future, as in 24, 15; 27, 10. The read- 
ing varies in 24, 25. The first infinitive represents the act as 
fixed, certain ; the second as future. The famine that was to take 
place was decreed. See Mt. § 498.e; C. § 583.— eq’ ory rip 
oikoupevny, over the whole land, i. e. Judea and the adjacent country. 
The Greek and Roman writers employed 4 oixovpévy to denote the 


Greek and the Roman world ; and a Jewish writer would naturally 
employ such a term to denote the Jewish world. We have a 
clear instance of that use in Jos. Antt. 8.13. 4. Speaking of the 
efforts of Ahab to find the prophet Elijah, he says that he sent 
messengers in pursuit of him xara macav tiv oikovperny, i. e€. 
throughout the entire land of the Jews. Ancient writers give no 
account of any universal famine in the reign of Claudius, but they 
speak of several local famines which were severe in particular 
countries. Josephus (Antt. 20.2. 6; Ib. 5. 2) mentions one which 
prevailed at that time in Judea, and swept away many of the in- 
habitants. Helena, queen of Adiabne, a Jewish proselyte who was 
then at Jerusalem, imported provisions from Egypt and Cyprus, 
which she distributed among the people to save them from starva- 
tion. This is the famine, probably, to which Luke refers here. 
The chronology admits of this supposition. According to Jose- 
phus, the famine which he describes took place when Cuspius 
Fadus and Tiberius Alexander were procurators; i. e. as Lard- 
ner suggests, it may have begun about the close of A. D. 44, and 
lasted three or four years. Fadus was sent into Judea on the death 
of Agrippa, which occurred in August of the year 44. — éni 
Kiavdiov, in the reign of Claudius. On éni, in Buch chronological 
designations, see K. § 273. 4. b. 

V. 29. rév padyraéy is attracted into the genitive by mis, instead 
of ai padnrai cabas niopeiré tis adtav (Mey., De Wet.): The disci- 
ples in proportion as any one was prospered determined each of * 
them, etc. ‘The apostle Paul prescribes the same rule of contribu- 
tion in 1 Cor. 16,2. For the augment in nimopeiro, see on 2, 26. 
-€kaoros stands often after verbs in apposition with a plural subject ; 
comp. 2,6; Matt. 18, 35; John 16, 32. K. § 266. 3, 

V. 30. pos rods mpecBurépous, unto the elders of the church at 
Jerusalem. It would be easy for them to distribute the supplies 
among the destitute in other parts of Judea. See further in the 
Note on 14, 23. — BapyaBa is the Doric genitive; comp. 19, 14; 
Luke 13, 29; John 1, 43, etc. W.§ 8.1; K.§ 44. R. 2. 


164 NOTES. [CHAP, XII. 1, 2 


CHAPTER XII. 


V. 1,2. Renewed Persecution at Jerusalem, and Death of James. 


V. 1. kar’ éxeivoy riv xaipdv, about that time, i. e. when Barnabas 
and Saul went to Jerusalem, as has just been related. See on v. 25. 
—‘Hpodns. This was Agrippa the First, son of Aristobulus and 
grandson of Herod the Great. On the accession of Caligula, he 
received as king the former possessions of Philip and Lysanias, see 
Luke 3, 1; ata later period, the tetrarchy of Antipas; and in the 
year A. D, 41, Samaria and Judea, which were conferred on him by 
Claudius ; so that, like his grandfather Herod, he swayed the scep- 
tre, at this time, over all Palestine.* — éméBade ras xeipas does not 
mean attempted (Kuin.), but put forth violent hands; comp. 4, 3; 
5, 18; 21,27. The construction here with the infinitive is pecu- 
liar (De Wet.). — dao rijs éxxdnotas, of the church (lit. from), since 
the idea of origin passes readily into that of property, adherence. 
W. § 51. 5. b. | 

V.2. aveiie payaipa, slew him with the sword, beheaded him. 
The article fails, because the idea is general, abstract; comp. 
9,12; W.§ 18.1. On the mode of execution among the Jews, 
see Jahn’s Archeol. § 257. Agrippa had the power of life and 
.death, since he administered the government in the name of the 
Romans. See the Note on 7, 59. The victim of his violence 
was James the Elder, a son of Zebedee and brother of John (Matt. 
4,21; 10,2; Mark 1, 19, etc.). He is to be distinguished from 
James the Younger, the kinsman of the Lord (Gal. 1, 19), who is 
the individual meant under this name in the remainder of the his- 
tory (17; 15, 13; 21, 18). The end of James verified the pre- 
diction that he should drink of his Master’s cup; see Matt. 20, 23. 
—‘ The accuracy of the sacred writer, in the expressions which 
he uses here, is remarkable. There was no portion of time for 
thirty years before, or ever afterwards, in which there was a king 
at Jerusalem, a person exercising that authority in Judea, or to 
whom that title could be applied, except the last three years of 
Herod’s life, within which period the transaction here recorded 





* See Introduction, § 6. 2. 


CHAP. XII. 2-6.] NOTES. 165 


took place.” Paley. The kingdom of Agrippa the Second, who 
is mentioned 25, 18, did not embrace Judea. 


V. 3-5. The Imprisonment of Peter. 


V. 3. idv Sr dpeorév, x. r.. Josephus (Antt. 19. 7. 3) at- 
tributes to Agrippa the same trait of character; he describes him 
as eager to ingratiate himself with the Jews. — mpoce@ero, x. T. X., 
he apprehended still further Peter also ; an imitation of the Heb. 
O12 with the infinitive, comp. Luke 20, 11. 12. W.4§ 58.5; 
Gesen. Heb. Gr. § 139.— dgipov, the days of unleavened bread, 
i. e. the festival of the Passover, which continued seven days ; and 
was so named because during that time no leaven was allowed in 
the houses of the Jews. The common text omits ai before jpépar, 
which the best editors insert as well attested. It is not grammati- 
cally necessary. W.§ 18. 2. 

V. 4. kai, also, carries the mind back to cvAAaBeiy in v. 3, the 
idea of which midoas repeats. — téccapor rerpadios, to four quater- 
nions, four companies of four, who were to relieve each other in 
guarding the prison. The Jews at this time followed the Roman 
practice of dividing the night into four watches, consisting of three 
hours each (Wlch.). Of the four soldiers employed at the same 
time, two watched in the prison and two before the door; see on 
v. 10. — BovdAduevos, meaning ; see 5, 28. — pera 1d mdoya, after the 
Passover, i. e. not the paschal supper, but the festival which it in- 
troduced ; comp. Luke 21,1; John 6,4. The reason for defer- 
ring the execution was that the stricter Jews regarded it as a prof- 
anation to put a person to death during a religious festival. Agrip- 
pa himself may have entertained, or affected to entertain, that 
scruple. — dvayayeiv airov, to bring him up, i. e. for trial and exe- 
cution ; comp. Luke 22, 66. But Herod was nearer his end than 
Peter. —r@ hag, for the people (dat. comm.), i.e. that they might 
be gratified with his death. 

V. 5.  éxrevjs, intent, earnest, not incessant (Eng. vers.) ; comp. 
Luke 22, 44; 1 Pet. 4, 8. — ékkAnoias. The members of the 
church were so numerous, that they must have met in different 
companies. One of them is mentioned in v. 12. 


V.6-11. The Miraculous Liberation of Peter. 


V. 6. veri éxeivy, in that night preceding the day when he was 
to have been executed. — dedepevos ddvoeot Svci, bound with two 


166 NOTES. [CHAP. XII. 6-10. 


cha'ns. The Roman mode of chaining prisoners was adopted in 
this case, and was the following: ‘The soldier who was ap- 
‘ pointed to guard a particular prisoner had the chain fastened to the 
wrist of his left hand, the right remaining at liberty. The prisoner, 
on the contrary, had the chain fastened to the wrist of his right 
hand. ‘The prisoner and the soldier who had the care of him were 
said to be tied (alligati) to one another. Sometimes, for greater 
security, the prisoner was chained to two soldiers, one on each side 
of him.” Dict. of Antiqq. art. Catena. Paul was bound with two 
chains on the occasion mentioned in 21, 33. — idakés re, x. 7. ., and 
keepers before the door kept watch (Raph., Wlch.) ; or, guarded the 
prison (De Wet.). “If rijs Oépas be the door before Peter’s apart- 
ment (comp. mporny gvdakyy in v. 10), the first sense is the best. 

V. 7. é ro oixnyatt, in the abode — the prison. This was an 
Attic euphemism which passed at length into the common dialect. 
—dvdora is a second aorist imperative; comp. Eph. 5, 14. 
Grammarians represent the form as poetic in the earlier Greek. 
K. § 172. R.5; W. § 14. 1. h. — ééémecov .... xepav, his chains 
fell off from his hands, or wrists. xeip the Greeks could use of 
the entire fore-arm, or any part of it. 

V.8. sepi{woa. For convenience he had unbound the girdle of 
his tunic while he slept. The iudriov which he threw around him 
was the outer coat, or mantle, worn over the yiréy. ‘There was no 
occasion for a precipitate flight; and the articles which he was di- 
rected to take would be useful to him. Note the transition to the 
present in the last two imperatives. 

V.9. ddnéés, true, actual, as distinguished from a dream or 
vision. Peter’s uncertainty arose from the extraordinary nature of 
the interposition ; it was too strange to be credited. He was be- 
wildered by the scene, unable at the moment to comprehend that 
what he saw and did was a reality. 

V. 10. SreAOdvres .... Sevrépav, having passed through the first 
and second watch, i.e. as Walch* suggests, first through the two 
soldiers stationed at Peter’s door (v. 6), and then through two 
others near the gate which led into the city. He supposes the two 
soldiers to whom Peter was bound (v. 6) were not included in the 
sixteen (v. 4), since their office would not require them to remain 
awake, and consequently to be changed during the night, like the 





* Dissertatio de Vinculis Petri. 


CHAP. XII. 10-13.] NOTES. 167 


others. A more common opinion is, that the first watch was a sin- 
gle soldier, before the door, and the second another at the iron gate, 
and that these two soldiers, with the two by the side of Peter, made 
up the quaternion then on duty. But d:eAédvres suggests a plural 
sense of gvdaxy; having passed through must be said loosely, if 
we apply it toa single person. ‘This participle supposes a different 
position of the first watch from that of the two soldiers who guarded 
Peter in his cell; some have proposed that explanation. The 
numeral renders the article unnecessary. W. § 18. 2. That 
Peter passed the watch unopposed, or perhaps unobserved (see v. 
18), was a part of the miracle. — én rv midnv, x. r.r. The pre- 
cise situation of the prison is unknown. ‘The iron gate may have 
formed the termination of a court, or avenue, which connected 
the prison with the town. De Wette, after Walch and others, 
thinks that the prison was in a tower between the two walls of the 
city, and that this was the outer gate of the tower. Others have 
proposed other conjectures. — avroparn is equivalent to an adverb, 
spontaneously. K.§ 264. 3. c; B.§ 123.6. The gate opened 
without any visible cause. — Avuny pilav. The angel accompanied 
him until he was beyond the reach of pursuit. 

VL 1L.  yevduevos ev éavrg, having come to himself, recovered 
from the confusion of mind into which he had been thrown. — 
dns mdons ris mpoc8oxias, from all the expectation of the Jews who 


were so eager for his execution, and looking forward to it with 
confidence. 


V. 12-17. Peter repairs to the House of Mary, where some of 
the Believers had assembled for Prayer. 


V. 12. cumddr, sc. ra yevdpeva, being conscious, having assured 
himself that what had taken place was real (Whl.). Some supply 
€vavté, and render considering, i. e. either what he should do 
(Bng., Olsh.), or where he should find an assembly of the disciples 
(Mey.).— Iwdvvov....Madpxov. He is called simply John in 18, 
5. 13 and Mark in 15, 39. He is supposed to have been the same 
Mark whom Peter terms his son in 1 Pet. 5, 13, i. e. in a spiritual 
sense, converted by his instrumentality. There is no reason for 
questioning his identity with the Evangelist who wrote the Gospel of 
‘Mark. See further on v. 25. — mpocevxopevor. One of the objects 
for which they were praying was the safety of Peter (v. 5). 

V. 13. aadioxn, a maid-servant. Her Greek name does not 


168 NOTES. [cHAP. XII. 13-18. 


disprove her Jewish origin; see on 1, 23. — imaxotoa, to hearken. 
This was the classical term signifying to answer a knock at the - 
door. 

V. 14. kal émyvotca, and having recognized (3,10; 4,13). He 
may be supposed to have announced his name, or to have given it 
in reply to her inquiry, —dzd ris xapas. Nothing could be more 
life-like than the description of the scene which follows. It has 
every appearance of having been derived from an eyewitness. 
Mark was undoubtedly in the house at the time, and may have 
communicated the circumstances to Luke at Antioch; or Luke may 
have obtained his information from Barnabas, who was a relative of 
the family ; see Col. 4, 10. 

V. 15. diicxupifero, affirmed confidently. — 6 dyyedos adrod éorw, 
It is his angel, i.e. his tutelary angel with his form and features. 
It was a common belief among the Jews, says Lightfoot, that every 
individual has a guardian angel, and that this angel may assume a 
visible appearance resembling’ that of the person whose destiny is 
committed to him. This idea appears here not as a doctrine of the 
Scriptures, but as a popular opinion, which is neither, affirmed nor 
denied. 

V.17. xaraceicas. Their joy was so tumultuous, that he could 
make them understand a gesture better than a word. — oryav. His 
object was not to prevent their being overheard, and so discovered 
by their enemies, but to secure to himself an opportunity to inform 
them how he had been liberated. — 6 xvpios, the Lord, as the angel 
had been sent by him; see v. 7, 11.—IaxéBo. He is distin- 
guished from the others on account of his office as pastor of the 
church at Jerusalem ; see on v. 2. — kai é£ehOav, and going forth, 
i. e. from the house, as the context most readily suggests ; hence 
els €repov romov is indefinite, and may denote unto another place, in 
the city or out of it. It is most probable that he left the city for a 
time, as he must have foreseen (see v. 19) that vigorous efforts 
would be made to retake and destroy him. We find him at Jeru- 
salem again a few years after this; see 15,7. He may have re- 
turned even sooner than that, as Agrippa lived but a short time 
after this occurrence. 


V. 18,19. Trial and Execution of the Soldiers. 


V. 18. -yevopévns jpépas. If the soldiers to whom Peter was 
bound had been changed at the expiration of each watch (see on 


CHAP. XII. 18 —20. ] NOTES. 169 


v. 10), why did they not ascertain the escape sooner ? — rdpaxos, 
commotion, partaking of the nature both of inquiry and alarm. The 
former part of the idea leads the way to the question which fol- 
lows. There was reason for fear, because the soldiers in such a 
case were answerable for the safety of the prisoner, and, if he 
escaped, were liable to suffer the punishment which would have 
been inflicted on him. Compare 16,27; Matt. 28,14. orparimras 
would include naturally the entire sixteen (v. 4), though the four 
who were on guard at the time of the escape had most reason to 
tremble for their lives. — ri dpa, x. r. X., what then (syHlogistioal, 
since he was gone) was become of Peter ? 

V. 19.  dvaxpivas, having examined, tried them for a breach of 
discipline; see 4, 9; Luke 23, 14.— We need not impute to 
Herod such barbarity as that of putting to death the entire detach- 
ment. dvAaxas may be understood of those who were more im- 
mediately responsible for the prisoner’s safety, — draxOjva, to be 
led away, i. e. to execution. The word was a vow solennis in this 
sense, as Ldsner, Kypke, and others, have shown. ‘The Romans 
employed ducere in the same absolute way. — kal xarehOav, k. T. X. 
Herod resided usually at Jerusalem, and went now to Cesarea, as 
Josephus informs us, to preside at the public games in honor of the 
Emperor Claudius. 


V. 20-24. Death of Herod Agrippa at Caesarea. 


The reader should compare the narrative of this event with that 
of Josephus, in Antt. 19.8.2. The Jewish historian has confirmed 
Luke’s account in the most striking manner. He also makes Ceesa- 
_rea the scene of the occurrence; he mentions the assembly, the 
oration, the robe, the impious acclamations of the people, the sud- 
den death of Herod, and adds to the rest that his terrible end was a 
judgment inflicted upon him for his impiety. 

“V. 20. Ovpopayéy may refer to an open war or a violent feeling 
of hostility. As Josephus makes no mention of any actual out- 
break. between Agrippa and the Pheenicians, the latter is probably 
the sense of the word here. The Phcenicians may either have ap- 
prehended a war as the result of Agrippa’s anger, or they may 
have been threatened with an interruption of the commerce carried 
on between them and the Jews. — rapijoav mpds avrov, came unto 
him, i. e. in the person of their representatives ; lit. were present, 
the antecedent motion being implied. W. § 54. 4. b. — meicavres, 

22 


170 NOTES. [cHap. x11. 20-93, 


having conctliated, secured his favor; see Gal. 1, 10. Blastus, 
judging from his name, may have been a Greek or a Roman. His 
- influence with the king was the reason why they were so anxious to 
obtain his mediation. —éi rod xoirdévos, over his bedchamber, his 
chamberlain. — jjrodvro eiphyny, desired peace, i. e., according to the 
circumstances of the case, sought to avert a rupture of it, or, if it 
was already impaired, to effect its restoration. ‘Their desire for 
this result may have been increased by the existing famine. — da 
To tTpepecOa, x. t. A. The Tyrians and Sidonians were a commer- 
cial people, and procured their supplies of grain chiefly from Pales- 
tine in exchange for their own merchandise. This relation of the 
two countries to each other had existed from early times; see 
1 Kings 5,9; Ezra 3,'7; Ezek. 27, 17. 

V.21.  raxrf jpépa, on an appointed day, which, according to 
Josephus, was the Ist of August, and the second day of the public 
games. — évdvoduevos éoOnra,x.t.d. The circumstances related by 
Josephus may be combined with Luke’s account, as follows : — 
** On the second day of the festival, Agrippa came into the thea- 
tre. The stone seats, rising in a great semicircle, tier above 
tier, were covered with an excited multitude. The king came in, 
clothed in magnificent robes, of which silver was the costly and 
brilliant material. It was early in the day, and the sun’s rays fell 
upon the king, so that the eyes of the beholders were dazzled with 
the brightness which surrounded him. Voices from the crowd, here 
and there, exclaimed that it was the apparition of something divine. 
And when he spoke and made an oration to them, they gave a 
shout, saying, ‘ It is the voice of a god, and not of a man.’ But in 
the midst of this idolatrous ostentation, an angel of God suddenly 
smote him. He was carried out of the theatre a dying man, and on 
the 6th of August he was dead.” Life and Letters of Paul, p. 139. 
— én rod Biparos, upon the tribune, or throne, provided for him in 
the theatre; see on 19, 29.— pds airovs, unto them, i. e. the 
deputies who appeared in behalf of the Tyrians and Sidonians 
(Kuin., De Wet.) ; or, indefinite, unto the assembly. 

V. 22. In such a city, most of those present would doubtless be 
heathen, and cod is to be taken in their sense of the term. 

V. 23. dv dv, x. tr. d., because he gave not glory to God, i.e. 
did not repel the impious flattery, was willing to receive it. Some 
editors insert rv before dofav.—xai yevduevos, x. Tr. X., and having 
been eaten with worms, he expired. In ascribing Agrippa’s death 


CHAP. XII, 23— XIII. 1.] NOTES. 171 


to such a cause, Luke makes it evident that he did not mean to 
represent it as instantaneous. His statement, therefore, does not 
oppose that of Josephus, who says that Herod lingered for five 
days after the first attack, in the greatest agony, and then died. 
It is evident also, for the same reason, that Luke did not consider 
the angel as the author of Herod’s death in any such sense as to 
exclude the intervention of secondary causes. 

V. 24. 8€, but, contrasts slightly the fate of Herod, the persecu- 
tor of the church, with the prosperity of the church itself. — 6 d6- 
yos.... emdnbivero, the word of God grew, was diffused more and 
more, and increased, i. e. (comp. 6, 1) was embraced by increas- 
ing numbers. Adyos suggests the complex idea of doctrine and dis- 
ciples, and the verbs which follow divide the idea into its parts. 


V.25. Barnabas and Saul return to Antioch. 


This verse appears to be introductory to the subject of the 
next chapter. It was proper to apprise the reader that Barnabas 
and Saul returned to Antioch (see 11, 30), since the narrative 
of what next occurred in that city implied that they were there. 
Paul and Barnabas made this journey to Jerusalem probably near 
the beginning of the year 45; for the famine commenced at the 
close of the preceding year (see on 11, 28), and the supplies col- 
lected in anticipation of that event would naturally be forwarded 
before the distress began to be severe. ‘They appear to have re- 
mained there but a short time, as may be inferred from the object 
of their mission, and still more decisively from the absence of any 
allusion to this journey in Gal. 2, 1 sq. — "Iwavyyy. He was. a rela- 
tive of Barnabas, as we learn from Col. 4, 10; and this relation- 
ship may have led to the present connection. He appears next in 
the history as their associate in missionary labors (13,5). 





CHAPTER XIII. 


V. 1-3. Barnabas and Saul are sent to preach to the Heathen. 


V. 1. xara tiv otcay exkAnciay, in (De Wett., Win., Rob.) the 
church existing there. According to Meyer, xara denotes the direc- 
tion of their labors, i. e. for the church. twes distinguishes those 


172 NOTES. [CHAP. XIII. 1, 2. 


named from the other members. It is doubtful whether the word be 
genuine. — mpodjra (see on 2, 17) is the specific term; didacKadox 
the generic. The prophets were all teachers, but the reverse was 
not true. Compare the Note on 14, 23. — Zupewr is otherwise un- 
known. — Aovxios may be the person who is mentioned in Rom. 16, 
-21. That he was the writer of the Acts is an incorrect opinion, 
since this name and Aovxiaves or Aovxas are entirely distinct. See W. 
§ 16.4. R. 1. — Kupnvaios. See on 2, 10. — Mavajy = BIN (2 Kings 
15, 14) occurs only here. — ‘Hpodov rod rerpdpyov. This Herod 
was the one who put to death John the Baptist ; a son of Herod the 
Great, and an uncle of Agrippa, whose death has just been related. 
He was now in exile on the banks of the Rhone, and is called 
telrarch because he was best known by that title. ‘There are two 
views as to the import of ovvrpodos. One is that it means comrade, 
lit. one brought up, educated with another. It was very common 
for persons of rank to associate other children with their own, for 
the purpose of sharing their amusements and studies, and by their 
example serving to excite them to greater emulation. Josephus, 
Plutarch, Polybius, and others, speak of this ancient practice. So 
Calvin, Grotids, Schott, Bloomfield, and others, The more ap- 
proved opinion is that it means collactaneus, nourished at the same 
breast, foster-brother. Kuinoel, Olshausen, Tholuck, De Wette, 
and others, follow Walch* in the adoption of that meaning. 
V.2. Xevroupyovrrwr refers here to the rites of christian worship, 
as prayer, exhortation, fasting, see v. 3. 15; 14, 23. — atray, i. e. 
the prophets and teachers. ‘The participation of others in the ser- 
vice is not asserted, or denied, It is possible that they were observ- 
ing a season of prayer with reference to this very question, What 
were their duties in relation to the heathen. — 67 strengthens the 
command ; see 15, 36; Luke 2, 15. K. § 315. 1. The verb 
contains the idea both of selection and consecration. — 6, unto 
which. By a species of attraction the relative often omits the prep- 
osition when the antecedent has it. Mt. § 595. 4. c. — mpooxéxAnpa 
has a middle sense. W.{§ 40. 3. The nature of this work, not 
stated here, we learn from the subsequent narrative ; they were to 
go into foreign countries and publish the gospel to Jews and Gen- 
tiles. The great object of the mission was doubtless to open more 
effectually ‘*the door of faith to the heathen.” 





* Dissertatio de Menachemo, cuvtpép@ Herodis. 


CHAP. XIII. 3, 4.]_ NOTES. 173 


V.3. rére,x. 7. dX. This was a different fast from that spoken 
of in v. 2.— On émévres ras xeipas avrois, see 6,6. Paul was al- 
ready a minister and an apostle (see Gal. 1, 1 sq.), and by this ser- 
vice he and Barnabas were now merely set apart for the accom- 
plishment of a specific work. They were summoned to a renewed 
and more systematic prosecution of the enterprise of converting the 
heathen ; see on 9, 30; 11, 20. 


V. 4-12. The Journey to Cyprus, and its Results. 


V.4. éxmeupOevtes. We may place this mission in the year 
A. D. 45. It does not appear that they remained long at Antioch 
before their departure. See the Note on 12, 25. — eis riv SeAevcerav. 
Seleucia lay west of Antioch, on the sea-coast, five miles north of 
the mouth of the Orontes. It was situated on a rocky eminence, 
forming the southern extremity of the hilly range called Pieria. 
The harbor and mercantile suburb were on level ground towards 
the west. It had, properly speaking, two ports. ‘* The inner basin, 
or dock, is now a morass; but its dimensions can be measured, and 
the walls-that surrounded it can be distinctly traced. The position 
of the ancient flood-gates, and the passage through which the ves- 
sels were moved from the inner to the outer harbor, can be accu- 
rately marked. The very piers of the outer harbor are still to be 
seen under the water. ‘The stones are of great size, some of them 
twenty feet long, five feet deep, and six feet wide; and are fastened 
to each other with iron cramps. The masonry of ancient Seleucia 
is still so good, that not long since a Turkish Pacha conceived the 
idea of clearing out and repairing the harbor.” ‘Those piers were 
still unbroken, this great seaport of the Seleucide and the Ptol- 
emies was as magnificent as ever, under the sway of the Romans, 
when Paul and Barnabas passed through it on their present mis- 
sion. 

Whether they came down hither by land, or by water, xar#\ov 
does not decide. The windings of the river make the distance 
about forty-one miles, while the journey by land is only sixteen 
miles and a half. At present, the Orontes is not navigable, in con- 
sequence of a bar at the mouth, and other obstructions ; but Strabo 
says (16. 2), that in his time they sailed up the stream in one day. 
If they travelled by land, “they crossed the Orontes at the north 
side of Antioch, and came along the base of the Pierian hills by a 
route which is now roughly covered with fragrant and picturesque 


174 NOTES. [CHAP. XIII. 4, 5. 


shrubs, but which then doubtless was a track well worn by travel- 
lers, like the road from the Pireus to Athens, or from Ostia to 
Rome.” Here, at Seleucia, “in the midst of unsympathizing sail- 
ors, the two missionary apostles, with their younger companion, 
stepped on board the vessel which was to convey them to Salamis. 
As they cleared the port, the whole sweep of the bay of Antioch 
opened on their left, — the low ground by the mouth of the Oron- 
tes, — the wild and woody country beyond it, — and then the peak 
of Mount Cassius, rising symmetrically from the very edge of the 
sea to a height of five thousand feet. On the right, in the south- 
west horizon, if the day was clear, they saw the island of Cyprus 
from the first. ‘The current sets northerly and northeast between 
the island and the Syrian coast. But with a fair wind, a few hours 
would enable them to run down from Seleucia to Salamis ; and the 
land would rapidly rise in forms well known and familiar to Barna- 
bas and Mark.” Life and Letters of Paul, p. 150. The fact that 
Barnabas was a native of Cyprus (4, 36) may have induced them 
to direct their way first to this island. 

V. 5. wat yevopevos ev Sadrapim, And having arrived in. Salamis ; 
not when they were there = évres (Eng. vers.). This town was on 
the eastern shore of Cyprus, “on a bight of the coast to the north 
of the river Pedisus. A large city by the sea-shore, a wide- 
spread plain with corn-fields and orchards, and the blue distance of 
mountains beyond, composed the view on which the eyes of Barna- 
bas and Saul rested when they came to anchor in the bay of Sala- 
mis.” — ais cuvaywyais indicates that the Jews here were numer- 
ous, since in other places where they were few they had only one 
synagogue ; comp. 17, 1; 18,4. ‘This intimation is confirmed by 
ancient testimony. In the time of Trajan, A. D. 116, the Jews in 
Cyprus were so powerful that they rose and massacred two hundred 
and forty thousand of the Greek inhabitants (Dio Cass. 68. 32). 
In revenge for this slaughter, Hadrian, who was afterwards emper- 
or, landed on the island, and either put to death or expelled the. 
entire Jewish population. At the time of Paul’s visit, many of the 
Cyprian Jews must have resided at Salamis, which was the seat of 
a lucrative commerce. —elxyov.... imnpérny, and they had also 
John (see 12, 25) as an assistant —in what? kai, it seems to me, 
recalls most naturally xarjyyeAAov tov Adyov; and the answer would 
be that he assisted them in the declaration of the word. Compare 
26,16; Luke 1,2; 1 Cor. 4,1. But the view of most critics is 


CHAP. XIII. 5-—7.] NOTES. 175 


different ; they suppose John to have had charge of the incidental 
cares of the party, so as to leave Paul and Barnabas more at 
liberty to preach the gospel. We are not informed how long they 
remained at Salamis, or what success attended their labors. 

V.6. deAOovres, x. 7. X., And having passed through the whole 
island unto Paphos, which was at the other end of Cyprus. The 
city intended here was new Paphos, in distinction from the old city 
of that name, which was several miles farther south. The distance 
from east to west was not more than a hundred miles. The Peu- 
tingerian Table (which dates probably from the time of Alexander 
Severus, i. e. about A. D. 230*) represents a public road as ex- 
tending from Salamis to Paphos. If that road existed at this earlier 
period, Paul arrived at Paphos in a short time, and without diffi- 
culty. The present Baffa occupies the site of that city. — edpdv 
twa pdyov, found a certain Magian, which was his professional 
title, since it stands for *Edvyas in v. 8; not sorcerer (Eng. vers.), 
which would be opprobrious. — evdorpodyrny is the narrator’s term 
for describing him ; he was a fortune-teller, but his art was an im- 
position. ‘The introduction of sucha person, under just these cir- 
cumstances, presents a true picture of the times. At that period, 
“ impostors from the East, pretending to magical powers, had great 
influence over the Roman mind. Perhaps we can hardly wonder, 
when the East was thrown open, — the land of mystery, the foun- 
tain of the earliest migrations, the cradle of the earliest religions, — 
that the imagination both of the populace and the aristocracy of 
Rome became fanatically excited. Not only was the metropolis of 
the empire crowded with ‘hungry Greeks,’ but ‘Syrian fortune- 
tellers’ and Jewish flocked into all the haunts of public amuse- 
ment. Marius had in his army a Syrian, probably a Jewish, 
prophetess, by whose divinations he regulated the progress of his 
campaigns. Pompey, Crassus, and Cesar sought information from 
Oriental astrology. Juvenal (10. 93) shows us the Emperor Ti- 
berius ‘ sitting on the rock of Capri, with his flock of Chaldeans 
round him.’ ‘Tacitus in his History speaks of the astrologers 
and sorcerers as a class of men who ‘will always be discarded 
and always cherished.’” Life and Letters of Paul, p. 157 sq. 

V.7. ds qv, Kk. 7. A., who was with the proconsul Sergius Paulus. 
It would not have been correct to apply this title to the governor of 





* See Forbiger’s Handbuch der alten Geographie, Vol. I, p. 469 sq. 


176 NOTES. [CHAP, XIII. 7. 


every Roman province, or even to the governor of the same prov- 
ince at different periods. It was so difficult to observe accuracy in 
the use of the varying titles given to Roman magistrates, that sev- 
eral of the classic authors of this period have, beyond all question, 
‘misapplied them in various instances. Luke was exposed to error 
in this passage on the right hand and on the left. On the estab- 
lishment of the empire, Augustus divided the provinces into two 
classes. ‘Those which required a military force he retained in his 
own hands, and the others he committed to the care of the Senate 
and the Roman people. The officers or governors sent into the em- 
peror’s provinces were styled propreetors or legates (propratores, 
legati, or avtiotparnyor, mpecBevrai) ; those sent into the people’s 
provinces were called proconsuls (proconsules, avOimaro.). Cyprus, 
then, must have been a senatorian province at this time, or Luke 
has assigned to Sergius a false title. But, further, the same prov- 
ince was often transferred from one jurisdiction to another. ‘Thus, 
in the present instance, Augustus at first reserved Cyprus to him- 
self, and committed its administration to propretors, or legates. 
Strabo informs us of that circumstance, and there leaves the matter. 
Hence it was supposed for a long time that Luke had committed 
an oversight here, or had styled Sergius proconsul without knowing 
the exact import of the appellation. But a passage was discovered 
at length in Dio Cassius (53. 12), which states that Augustus sub- 
sequently relinquished Cyprus to the Senate in exchange for another 
province, and (54. 4) that it was governed henceforth by procon- 
suls : kal otras avOvmaro. Kul és éxeiva ta €Ovn méprrec Oar Hpéavro. : 
Coins, too, struck in the reign of Claudius, have placed Luke’s 
accuracy here beyond exception. Bishop Marsh has the following 
remarks on one of them: “It was struck in the reign of Claudius 
Ceesar, whose head and name are on the face of it; and in the 
reign of Claudius St. Paul visited Cyprus. On this coin the same 
title, dvOvmaros, is given to Cominius Proclus which is given by 
Luke to Sergius Paulus; and the coincidence which it shows is of 
that description that is sufficient of itself to establish the authentici- 
ty of the work in which the coincidence is found.” Compare 
further, on 18, 12; 19, 38.—cuverd, intelligent, discerning. It 
may have been his possession of this quality that prompted him to 
seek the acquaintance of Elymas; he may have hoped to gain 
from him that deeper knowledge of futurity and of the mysteries 
of nature which the human mind craves so instinctively. It cer- 


CHAP. XIII. 7—9.] NOTES. 177 


tainly was proof of his discernment, that he was not deceived by 
the man’s pretensions; that, on hearing of the arrival of Paul and 
Barnabas, he sent for them, and, on the strength of the evidence 
which confirmed their doctrine, yielded his mind to it. — éme{nrnoev, 
desired earnestly. 

V.8. °Edvpas is an Arabic word which means the wise. It was 
a title of honor, like 6 yayos, to which it is here put as equivalent. 
He was born, perhaps, in Arabia, or had lived there; and may 
have assumed this name, or had it bestowed upon him, as a compli- 
ment to his skill. — (yrév .... miorews, seeking to turn aside the 
proconsul from the faith, i. e. from its adoption; for he was not yet 
a believer see v. 12). 

V.9. 6 Kat Haddos, the also Paul = 6 kai xadovpevos Matdos. 6 
is the article here, not a pronoun. W. § 20.3. The origin of 
this name is still disputed, Among the later critics, Olshausen and 
Meyer adhere to the older view, that Paul assumed it out of respect 
to Sergius Paulus, who was converted by his instrumentality. But 
had the writer connected the name with that event, he would have 
introduced it more naturally after v. 12. He makes use of it, it 
will be observed, before speaking of the proconsul’s conversion. 
Neander objects further, that it was customary among the ancients 
for the pupil to adopt the name of the teacher, not the teacher to 
adopt that of the pupil. There is force, too, in his remark, that, 
according to this view, the apostle would seem to recognize the 
salvation of a distinguished person as more important than that of 
others ; for that Sergius was his first convert from heathenism, and 
received this honor on that account, assumes incorrectly that he had 
preached hitherto to none but those of his own nation. It is more 
probable that Paul acquired this name like other Jews in that age ; 
who, when they associated with foreigners, had often two names, 
the one Jewish, the other foreign; sometimes entirely distinct, as 
Onias and Menelaus, Hillel and Pollio, and sometimes similar in 
sound, as Tarphon and Trypho, Silas and Silvanus. In like man- 
ner the apostle may have been known as Saul among the Jews, and 
Paul among the heathen ; and, being a native of a foreign city, as 
Lightfoot suggests, he may have borne the two names from early 
life. ‘This explanation of the origin of the name accounts for its 
introduction at this stage of the history. It is here for the first 
time that Luke speaks directly of Paul’s labors among the heathen; 
and it is natural that he should apply to him the name by which he 

23 


178 NOTES. [CHAP. XIII. 9-13. 


was chiefly known in that sphere of his ministry. Neander thinks 
that Luke may have followed hitherto written memoranda, in which 
the apostle was called Saul. This hypothesis is unnecessary, 
either to account for the use of the other name here, or for the 
writer’s knowledge of Paul’s earlier history ; see Introd. § 3. — 
m\noOeis, x. t. AX. He was thus impelled to expose the man’s 
wickedness, and to announce his punishment. 

V. 10. d0dov, deceit, refers to his occupation ; padiovpyias, wick- 
edness, to his character. — vié d.aBddov, thou son of the devil. The 
kindredship is that of disposition, moral resemblance ; see John 8, 44. 
The second noun is sufficiently definite to omit the article. W.§ 18. 
It has the article, however, in other passages, except 1 Pet. 5, 8, 
where it stands in apposition. — ov maton .... evOeias; Wilt thou 
not cease to pervert, i. e. misrepresent, malign, the right ways of 
the Lord ? viz. those which he requires men to follow, as repent- 
ance, faith, obedience. It was christian truth, the gospel, which he 
opposed. Most critics prefer the interrogative form of the sen- 
tence as more forcible than the declarative. ov denies raion = 
persist (W. § 61. 3), and implies the ordinary affirmative answer. 
evdeias suggests possibly a contrast with his own ways, so full of 
deceit and obliquity. 

V. 11. xeip....c¢, i. e. for punishment; in a good sense, in 
11, 21. — yy Bréror states a consequence, hence py, not ov. — aype 
kaipov, until a season, the arrival of it, i. e. for a time; comp. Luke 
4, 13. — dydds kai oxdros, a mist and darkness, cause and effect. 

V. 12. éxmAnoodpevos .... kupiov, being astonished at the doc- 
trine of the Lord, i. e. its confirmation by such a miracle, comp. 


Mark 1, 27. 


V. 13-15. They proceed to Perga, and thence to Antioch in 
Pisidia. 

V. 13. dvaybévres, having put to sea, set sail (note the’ etymolo- 
gy), because the sea appears higher than the land. Paphos was on 
the sea-shore, and they would embark at that place. — oi epi rov 
TlatAov, Paul and his companions. epi presents the name after it 
as the central object of the group, see John 11,19. W. § 53. i. 
From this time Paul appears in the narrative as the principal per- 
son, and Barnabas as subordinate. — #Oov eis Tlépynv. They must 
have ‘sailed past the promontories of Drepanum and Acamas, and 
then across the waters of the Pamphylian Sea, leaving on the right 


CHAP. XIII. 13, 14.] NOTES. 179 


the cliffs (six hundred feet high) which form the western boundary 
of Cilicia, to the innermost bend of the bay of Attaleia.” Perga 
was the chief city of Pamphylia, situated on the Cestrus, about 
seven miles from its mouth. A bar obstructs the entrance of this 
river at the present time ; but Strabo (14. 4) says expressly that it 
was navigable in his day as far up as Perga. The ruins of this 
city are to be seen still, sixteen miles northeast of the modern 
Adalia, or Satalia. They consist of “ walls and towers, columns and 
cornices, a theatre and a stadium, a broken aqueduct, and tombs 
scattered on both sides of the site of the town. Nothing else re- 
mains of Perga but the beauty of its natural situation, between 
and upon the sides of two hills, with an extensive valley in front, 
watered by the river Cestrus, and backed by the mountains of the 
Taurus.” * — "I@dvyns, x. tr. % Why John Mark left them so 
abruptly is unknown. His reason for it, certainly, was not one 
which Paul approved, as appears from 15, 38. See the Note 
on that passage. 

V. 14.  adroi, they themselves, unaccompanied by their former as- 
sociate. — dd rijs Iépyns. The stay at Perga, therefore, was brief ; 
they did not even preach there at this time ; comp. 14, 25. What 
occasioned this singular haste? Very possibly they arrived there in 
the spring of the year, and, in order to prosecute their journey into 
the interior, were obliged to advance without delay. ‘ Earlier in 
the season the passes would have been filled with snow. In the heat 
of summer the weather would have been less favorable for the ex- 
pedition. In the autumn the disadvantages would have been still 
greater, from the approaching difficulties of winter.” + — eis ’Avrié- 





* The authority for this description is Sir C. Fellows’s “ Asia Minor,” 
pp. 190-193. 

t In 2 Cor. 11, 26, Paul says that he had been exposed cften to * perils 
of rivers,’ and ‘perils of robbers”’ (kivduvors morayav, xwwdvvas AnoTov). 
It has been suggested as not improbable, that he may have encountered 
some of these dangers on this journey from Perga in Pamphylia to Antioch 
in Pisidia,. ‘The lawless and marauding habits of the population of 
those mountains which separate the table-land in the interior of Asia Minor 
from the plains on the south coast, were notorious in all parts of ancient 
history, Strabo uses the same strong language both of the Isaurians (12.6), 
who separated Cappadocia from Cilicia, and of their neighbors the Pisidians 
(12. 7), whose native fortresses were the barrier between Phrygia and Pam- 
phylia. We have the same character of the latter of these robber tribes in 


180 3 NOTES. [CHAP. XIII, 14, 15. 


xevav. Antioch, which lay north from Perga, was on the central 
table-land of Asia Minor, on the confines of Pisidia and Phrygia. 
It was built by the founder of the Syrian Antioch. Under Augus- 
tus it rose to the rank of a colony. It was now an important city, 
inhabited by many Greeks, Romans, and Jews, in addition to its 
native population. The site of Antioch was first identified by 
Arundel in 1833. —rév caS8drov, of the Sabbath, i.e. the rest 
season. ‘The plural arose probably from the fact, that such a sea- 
son included often more than one day. See W. § 27. 3. 

V. 15. pera 8 hv avayvwow, x.t.d. The practice of reading the 
Scriptures in this manner grew up probably during the exile. Win. 
Realw. IL. p. 548.. voyuos here designates the Pentateuch; mpodijrat, 
the other books of the Old Testament, see Matt. 5, 17; Luke 16, 
16, etc. The Psalms formed sometimes a third division, see Luke 
24, 44. — dréoreiday, sc. imnpéerny (Luke 4, 20), the rulers of the 
synagogue (see on 9,2) sent unto them a servant. It may have 
been known that they were teachers, or, as Hemsen suggests, may 
have been inferred from their taking a seat which indicated that 
such was their office. — év iyiv, in you, your minds; comp. Gal. 
1,16; Phil. 1, 5. — wapaxdnoews, exhortation. The object was to 
incite them to a stricter observance of the law. 





Xenophon (Anab, 1.1.11; 9.9; 3, 2.14), who is the first to mention 
them; and in Zosismus (pp. 56-61, Bonn ed.), who tells us of the adven- 
tures of a robber chief who defied the Romans and died a desperate death 
in these mountains, Alexander the Great, when he marched from Perga 
to rejoin Parmenio in Phrygia, found some of the worst difficulties of his 
whole campaign in penetrating through this district (Arr. 1, 27, 28). No 
population, through the midst of which St, Paul ever travelled, abounded 
more in those ‘perils of robbers’ of which he himself speaks, than the 
wild and lawless clans of the Pisidian highlanders, 

*“ The natural character of the country itself must have exposed him to 
still other dangers, The rivers of Asia Minor, like all the rivers in the 
Levant, are liable to violent and sudden changes, And no district in Asia 
Minor is more singularly characterized by its ‘water floods’ than the 
mountainous tract of Pisidia, where rivers burst out at the bases of huge 
cliffs, or dash down wildly through narrow ravines, The very notice of 
the bridges in Strabo, when he tells us (12. 7), how the Cestrus and Eury- 
medon tumble down from the heights and precipices of Selge to the Pam- 
*phylian Sea, is more expressive than any elaborate description, We can- 
not determine the position of any bridges which the apostle may have 
crossed, but his course was never far from the channels of these two riv- 
ers.” Life and Letters of Paul, p, 175. 


CHAP. XIII. 16—20.] NOTES. 181 


V. 16-41. The Discourse of Paul at Antioch. 


The topics are, first, the goodness of God to Israel, especially in 
having promised to send to them a Saviour, 16-25; secondly, 
Jesus has been proved to be this Saviour, by his death and resurrec- 
tion, in accordance with the prophecies of the Old Testament, 
26 — 37; and, thirdly, it is the duty of men to receive him in this 
character, since they can be saved in no other way, 38-41. 

V. 16. of doBovpevor tov Oedv, as in 10, 2, i. e. Gentiles who 
were friendly to Judaism, but uncircumcised. They occupied, it is 
said, a separate place in the synagogue. ‘The contents of the ad- 
dress show that the Israelites greatly outnumbered that class of the 
hearers. This discourse deserves the more attention, as furnishing 
so copious an illustration of the apostle’s manner of preaching to 
the Jews. 

V. 17. dtyacev, exalted, made them numerous and powerful. — 
ev yn, in the land. For the absence of the article, see on 7, 29. — 
peta Bpaxiovos inrov, with a high arm,i. e. one raised on high, and 
so ever ready to protect and defend them; comp. Ex. 6, 6. 

V. 1S. érpopodopnoey = as tpodis éBdoracev, carried them as a 
nurse (Mey.), sustained, cared for them. The term is derived 
probably from Deut. 1, 31. Most of the later editors prefer this 
word to érpomddopncev, endured their manners. It is well attested, 
and suits the connection better, since what the apostle would bring 
to view here is not so much the forbearance of God towards his 
people, as his interpositions, his direct efforts in their behalf. 

V.19. 6m érad. See their names in Deut. 7,1. They were 
the principal tribes in Palestine at that time. — év y7, anarthrous as 
above. — katekAnpovopnoey avrois, assigned to them as a possession ; 
Hellenistic for the Hiphil of 9n2.* —riv yqv airav, their land by 
promise, gift; or, better, henceforth theirs and that of their descend- 
ants. 

V. 20. pera ratra, after these things, viz. the conquest and occu- 
pation.of the country.— és éreot .... xpirds, during about four 
hundred and fifty years he gave judges. For the dative, see on 
8, 11. This number is the sum of the years assigned in the Old 
Testament to the administration of the judges from the time of 
Joshua to the death of Eli, added to the sum of the years during 





* For the origin of such Hebraisms, see the writer’s Hebrew Exercises, 


p. 96. 


182 NOTES. [CHAP. XIII. 20-22. 


which the nation was subject to foreign oppressors. Hence it 
would be very natural for the Jews to speak of four hundred and 
fifty years as the proximate number of years during which the 
judges ruled. But whether the computation arose in that way, or 
some other, it was certainly in use among the Jews; for Josephus 
(Antt. 8. 2. 1) gives the time from the departure out of Egypt till 
the building of the temple as five hundred and ninety-two years. 
If we deduct from that the forty years in the wilderness, twenty- 
five for the administration of Joshua (Antt. 5. 1. 29, not stated in 
the Old Testament), forty for Saul’s reign (see v. 21), forty for 
David’s, and four under Solomon (1 Kings 6, 1), we have for the 
period of the judges four hundred and forty-three years, which the 
apostle could call, in round numbers, about four hundred and fifty 
years. It is evident, therefore, that Paul has followed here a mode 
of reckoning which was current at that time, and which, being a 
well-known received chronology, whether correct or incorrect in 
itself considered, was entirely correct for his object, which was not 
to settle a question about dates, but to recall to the minds of 
those whom he addressed a particular portion of the Jewish his- 
tory.* — gws Sayound, unto Samuel, who is to be included probably 
among the judges; or és may be taken as exclusive. How 
long he governed is not mentioned in 1 Sam. 7, 15, nor in 8, 3. 
The tradition (Jos. Antt. 6. 18. 5), which is not perhaps of much 
value, makes it twelve years. s would allow us to add these 
years to four hundred and fifty, if any one prefers that. 

V. 21. kdxeidev, and thereafier, is here an adverb of time. — 
rrncavro. See 1 Sam. 8, 5; 10, 1.— &ry teocupdxovra, which 
agrees with Jos. Antt. 6. 14. 9. The Old Testament does not 
mention the length of Saul’s reign. 

V. 22. peracrncas aitov, having removed him, i. e. from life 
(De Wet.) ; or from his office (Kuin.). The two events were co- 
incident in point of time. Saul reigned until his death, though 
David was anointed as prospective king during his lifetime. — ¢ 
.... paprupnaas, to whom (dat. comm.) also he testified, saying. 
The dative depends on the participle. ‘The apostle quotes the sub- 
stance of 1 Sam. 18, 14, and Ps. 89, 21. This commendation is 
not absolute, but describes the character of David in comparison 
with that of Saul. The latter was rejected for his disobedience and 
impiety ; David, on the contrary, was always faithful to the worship 





* See Appendix, No. 2, 


CHAP. XIII. 22—27.] NOTES. 183 


of Jehovah, and performed his commands as they were made 
known to him by revelation, or the messengers whom God sent to 
him. 

V.23. Jesus could not be the Messiah, unless he were descended 
from David. ovrov stands first, in order to give prominence to his 
descent from that source. — kar émayyeAiav, according to promise, 
as made to the fathers, v. 32; not to David merely. 

V. 24. “Iwdvvov. The Jews acknowledged John’s authority as a 
prophet, and were bound, therefore, to admit his testimony. — apo 
mpocwmou (= D7) Ths eiaddov adrod, before his entrance, i. e. upon 
his public ministry; see Matt. 11, 10; Luke 7, 27.— Bammopa 
peravoias, i. €. baptism which required repentance on the part of 
those who received it; see 19, 4. 

V. 25. @s.... dSpduov, Now as John was finishing his course, 
i. €. was near its close (De Wet., Mey.), not while he was complet- 
ing tt (Kuin., Olsh.).— riva pe, x. tr. 4., Whom do ye suppose that I 
am? I am not, viz. the Messiah. The predicate is omitted as 
well known; comp. Mark 13, 6; Luke 21,8; John 18, 19. Some 
critics (Calv., Raph., Kuin.) exclude the question, and render, he 
whom (riva = dvrwa) ye suppose, I am not. This punctuation does 
violence to the pronoun, while the sense has no advantage over the 
other. See W. § 25, 1, note. — epyerar per éué, x. 7. A. In this 
way he would express strongly his official and personal inferiority to 
Christ. It was an office of the lowest servants, not only among the 
Jews, but the Greeks and Romans, to bind and unbind the sandals 
of their masters. See Jahn’s Archeol. § 123. 

V. 26. ity includes both Jews and proselytes. — rijs carnpias 
ravtns, of this salvation which they preached (comp. 5, 20); or 
procured by Jesus, named in v, 23, — ameoradn, was sent forth, i. e. 
from God, the author of the word. 

V.27. -ydp confirms the implication in cernpias ravrns in v. 26, 
viz. that Jesus, whom Paul preached, was the.promised Saviour ; 
for (yap) he had suffered and been put to death, and so had fulfilled 
what was predicted of the Messiah. De Wette, Winer (§ 57. 6), 
and others, maintain this view of the connection. Meyer opposes 
wpiv in v. 26 to of karotkovrres here, i. e. the foreign Jews, being less 
guilty, had the message of salvation sent to them, which the other 
Jews had forfeited - ‘This explanation arrays the passage against 
other passages, e. g. 2, 38; 3, 17. 26. It was not true that those 
who crucified the Saviour excluded themselves from the offers of 


184 NOTES. [CHAP. XIII. 27— 33. 


the gospel.—-rodrov .... emdnpwoayr, this one not having known 
(failed to recognize), and the declarations of the prophets (gov- 
erned by the same participle), by having condemned him to death 
they fulfilled them, i. e. the declarations. This is the most approved 
translation. It obliges us, however, to supply pronouns after xpivav- 
res and éxAnpwoayv, which refer to different antecedents. De Wette 
construes dyvojcaytes as a verb: they knew him not, and the declara- 
tions .... fulfilled. For the participle, see K. Ausf. Gr. § 727, 
A. 4. This analysis secures more uniformity in the structure of 
the sentence ; but such a use of the participle is infrequent. ayvon- 
caves is milder than npynoacbe in 3, 18. See the Note there. 

V. 28. pndepiay .... ebpdvres, although they found no cause of 
death, none that justified it, see 28,18. They charged him with 
blasphemy and sedition, but could not establish the accusation. 
See 3, 13; Matt. 27, 24; Luke 238, 22. 

V. 29. nxav has the same subject as the other verbs, see v. 
27. The burial, however, was the particular act of Joseph of 
Arimathea and Nicodemus; see John 19, 38sq. What the apostle 
would assert is that Christ had fulfilled the prophecy, which an- 
nounced that he should be put to death, and rise again. It was not 
important that he should discriminate as to the character of the 
agents in the transaction. Some translate, those who took him 
down placed him, etc. The participle in that relation to the verb 
would require the article. 

V. 31. jpépas mAciovs. See on 1,3. — rois cvvavaBaow aire, 1. e. 
the Galilean disciples who attended him on his last journey to 
Jerusalem. They knew, therefore, what. they testified; their 
means of knowledge had been ample. This idea occurs in the 
Acts often. — viv, now. The resurrection rested not on tradition, 
but on the testimony of living men. The English version, after the 
received text, omits this particle. — apds rdv Aadv, unto the people, 
i. e. the Jews, see v. 24; 10, 42, etc. 

V. 32. kat Hpeis, and so we, i. e. in view of these various proofs 
that Jesus is the Messiah ; see v. 23, 25, 27, 31. — evayyedrCoueba 
has a double accusative only here. W. § 82. 4. — érayyeNav 
stands in the first clause with the usual effect of that attraction ; 
see on 3, 10. 

V. 33. éxmenAjpoxe, has completely fulfilled, stronger than éA7- 
pocav in v.27; because the resurrection, considered as involving the 
ascension and exaltation, was essentially the finishing act in the 


CHAP. XIII. 33, 34.] NOTES. 185 


fulfilment of the promise relating to the Messiah. — dvaorjcas "Incotv 
means, as Luther, Schott, Stier, De Wette, Meyer, Hengstenberg, 
Tholuck, and others, decide, having raised up Jesus from the 
grave ; not having brought him into existence (Calv., Bng., Kuin., 
Olsh.). . The mind attaches that sense to the word most readily 
after v. 30. It was unnecessary to insert é« vexpdv, because the 
context suggests the specific meaning ; comp. 2, 24. 32. dvaarjoas, 
in the sense of having raised up merely, expresses too little for the 
prophecy which that event is said to have fulfilled. The original 
passage refers, not to the incarnation of the Messiah, but to his in- 
auguration or public acknowledgment on the part of God as the 
rightful Sovereign of men. ‘To no moment in the history of Christ 
would such a prediction apply with such significance as to that of 
his triumphant resurrection from the dead. The progression of the 
argument in the next verse demands this interpretation. To the asser- 
tion here that God had raised Jesus to life again, the apostle adds there 
that this life was one which death would invade no more. — és kai, as 
also, i. e. what took place was foretold. — rpdére wadrue the second 
Psalm in our English version is named here, because in some manu- 
scripts the Hebrews reckoned the first Psalm merely as prefatory. 
Sdevrépm has much less support. — vids .... od (Ps. 2, 7) affirms the 
Sonship of the Messiah, which included his divine nature ; see Rom. 
1,4, Hence yeyéwnxd oe cannot refer to the origin of this relation- 
ship, but must receive a figurative interpretation ; either, I have be- 
gotten thee, brought thee into a state of glory and power such as 
Christ assumed after his resurrection as Mediator at the right hand 
of God; or, according to a familiar Hebrew usage, I have declared, 
exhibited thee as begotten, i.e. as my Son, viz. by the resurrec- 
tion from the dead (Rom. 1,4). For this declarative sense of 
Hebrew verbs, see the Note on 10, 15.— onpepoy, to-day, desig- 
nates the precise point of time on which the prophet’s eye was then 
fixed, viz. that of Christ’s assumption of his mediatorial power, or 
that of his open proclamation as Messiah on the part of God when 
he raised him from the dead. 

V. 34. dre... eis dsapOopdy, Further (as proof) that he raised 
him up from the dead as one who would die no more. 8 is pro- 
gressive. dvéornoev repeats the idea of the foregoing dvacrijeas, for 
the purpose of describing this resurrection more fully: it would be 
followed by no return to death. é« vexpdv does not distinguish the 
two words as to sense, but draws attention more strongly to the 

24 


186 NOTES. [CHAP. XIII. 34— 36. 


contrast between the death which he had suffered, and his exemp- 
tion from death in future. — pert... . ets SsapOopdy, as applied to 
Christ, whose body underwent no change while it remained in the 
grave, must be equivalent to ovxérs drofmoxe in Rom. 6,9. The 
dissolution or corruption of the body is the ordinary consequent of 
death; and hence, in common speech, to return to corruption and 
to die, or the opposite, not to return to corruption and not to die, 
are interchangeable expressions. See W. § 67.7. The perpetuity 
of Christ’s existence isan important truth in the christian system. 
In Rom. 5, 10, Paul urges it as a ground of certainty, that, if men 
believe on Christ, they will be finally saved, and in Rom. 6,9, as a 
pledge that, inasmuch as he “dies no more, we shall live with 
him ’’; see also John 14, 19; Heb. 7, 25, ete. This incidental 
agreement of the address with Paul’s circle of doctrine speaks for 
its genuineness, — ér: is the sign of quotation. —ddéc.... mard ex- 
presses the substantial sense of Is. 55,3: I will give to you, per- 
form unto you, the holy, inviolable promises of David (i. e. made 
to him), the sure. The language is very nearly that of the Seven- 
ty. One of these promises was that David should have a successor 
whose reign would be perpetual, the throne of whose kingdom God 
would establish for ever and ever; see 2 Sam. 7, 18 sq. It was 
essential to the accomplishment of that promise that the Messiah 
should be exempt from death, and hence, as Jesus had been proved 
to be the Messiah by his resurrection, that promise made it certain 
that he would live and reign henceforth, without being subject to 
any interruption of his existence or power. 

V. 35, 8d xai, Therefore also, i. e. because he was not mortal, 
in further confirmation of that fact. —év érép@, sc. aru, viz. 
16, 10. See on 2,25 sq. The inspired declaration that the Mes- 
siah should not experience the power of death had not only been 
verified in his resurrection, but guarantied that he would not ex- 
perience that power at any future period. — A¢ye, sc. Oeds, Viz. 
through David; see v. 34; 1, 16, etc. 

V. 36. ydp vindicates the reference of the passage to Christ, since 
it could not apply to David. — péyv is antithetic to 6 in v. 87.— idig 
yeved .... Bovdy admits of a twofold translation. yevea may depend 
on éinnpernoas: having served his own generation (been useful to 
it), according to the purpose of God (dative of norm or rule). 
Our English translators, Calvin, Doddridge, Robinson, and others, 
adopt this construction. Olshausen, Kuinoel, De Wette, Meyer, 


CHAP. XIII. 36—39.] NOTES. 187 


and others, refer Bovdy to the participle: having in his own genera- 
tion (dative of time), or for it (dat. comm.), served the purpose, plan 
of God, i. e. as an instrument for the execution of his designs ;/ 
comp. v. 22. yeved, if we connect it with the participle, secures to 
it a personal object, and in that way appears to form an easier ex- 
pression than BovAj with the participle. The main idea of the 
clause is that David, like other men, had but one generation of con- 
temporaries ; that he accomplished for that his allotted work, and 
then yielded to the universal law which consigns the race to death. 
Some join 77 Bovdg with éxouujén, which renders the remark much 
less significant. — cai mpogeréOn, x. 7. X., and he was added unto his 
fathers. This expression recognizes the existence of the soul in a 
future state (Bng., Olsh., Doddr.). Gesenius says that it is dis- 
tinguished expressly both from death and burial in Gen. 25,8; 
35, 29 ; 2 Kings 22, 20; see Lex. s. JON. — cide SuapOopay, saw cor- 
ruption as to his mortal part ; comp. 2, 31. 

V. 38. ody, illative. Jesus has been shown to be the Messiah, 
and he is, therefore, the author of pardon and salvation to those who 
believe on him. — &:a rovrov belongs to decors, rather than the verb : 
through this one the forgiveness of sins (having been procured) is 
announced unto you; comp. 10, 36; Luke 24, 47. The next 
verse reaffirms and amplifies the proposition. 

V. 39. The sentence here depends still on 67. A comma is 
the proper point between this verse and the last. The apostle de- 
clares now, first, that the forgiveness which Christ has procured is 
not partial, but extends to all the sins of the transgressor ; secondly, 
that all men need it, since no other way of pardon remains for 
those who are condemned by the law; and, thirdly, since faith in 
Christ is the only condition annexed to it, this salvation is free to 
all.—xai dnd mavrov, x. tr. ., and that from all things, i. e. sins, 
from which (= af dv by attraction) ye were not able by the law of 
Moses to be justified, etc. We cannot suppose this to mean, ac- 
cording to.a possible sense of the ‘words, that the gospel merely 
completes a justification which the law has commenced or accom- 
plished in part; for such an admission would be at variance with 
the doctrine of the New Testament in regard to the utter ineffi- 
cacy of all legal obedience to cancel the guilt of transgression, 
and the necessity of an exclusive reliance on the work of Christ for 
our justification. We must adopt a different view of the meaning. 
As Olshausen suggests, we may regard ay (= af dy) after ams 


188 NOTES. [CHAP. XIII. 39-41. 


navreay, not as a supplementary clause, but as explanatory of the 
other, or coextensive with it, viz. from all sins from which (i. e. 
from all which sins) ye were unable, etc. In other words, the first 
clause affirms the sufficiency of the gospel to justify from all sins, 
while the second clause affirms the insufficiency of the law to the 
same extent, i.e. to justify from any sins; comp. Rom. 8, 3 sq. 
Neander admits the necessity of rejecting the apparent sense of the 
words. As év rovr@ stands opposed to év voue, it belongs to d:casod- 
rat, not to morevov. 

V. 40, i) eNO, x. r. X., 1. @. lest the declaration be fulfilled, 
verified in your case. The mode of citing the prophecy shows 
that the apostle did not regard it as spoken in view of that occasion. 
— éy trois mpopynras, in the prophets, i. e. the part of the Old ‘Testa- 
ment which the Jews so named; comp. v. 15; 7, 42; John 6, 45. 
See W. § 27.2. The passage intended is Hab. 1, 5. 

V. 41. The citation follows very nearly the Septuagint, and 
agrees essentially with the Hebrew. In the original passage the 
prophet refers to a threatened invasion of the Jewish nation by the 
Chaldeans, and he calls upon his countrymen to behold the judg- 
ment to which their sins had exposed them, and to be astonished, to 
tremble, on account of it. Of this language the apostle avails him- 
self, in order to warn the Jews whom he addressed of the punish- 
ment which awaited them if they rejected the message which they 
had now heard. Calvin: ‘ Paulus fideliter accommodat in usum 
suum prophete verba, quia sicuti semel minatus fuerat Deus per 
prophetam suum Habacuc, ita etiam semper fuit sui similis.”” — of 
karappovynrai occurs in the Septuagint, but not in the Hebrew. The 
apostle could retain it, in perfect consonance with the original, be- 
cause it is the incredulity of the wicked, their contempt of God’s 
threatenings, which occasions their ruin. What suggested the word 
to the Seventy is uncertain. It is thought that they may have read 
n°33/3, instead of 07133, among the heathen. — kai Oavuacare, and 
wonder, be astonished, i. e. at the fearful, certain destruction which 
God prepares for his enemies. ‘The spectacle to which the prophet 
directs attention here is that of the Chaldeans, mustering their hosts 
to march against the guilty Jews. — kat ddavioOnre, and perish, un- 
able to escape the punishment which their sins have provoked. 
This word elicits an idea which the Hebrew text involves, though it 
is not expressed there. Paul has retained it from the Septuagint. 
— tpyov, k. t. Xu. a work of judgment I work, execute. The future 


CHAP. XIII. 41 —45.] NOTES. ; 189 


act is represented as present, because it was near. — The second 
épyov Paul inserts for the sake of emphasis. ‘The copies which 
omit it were corrected probably after the Septuagint. —é od py, 
k. tT. X., which ye would (or will) not believe, though any one 
should fully declare it to you, i. e. although apprised ever so dis- 
tinctly of their danger, they would not heed it; they are infatuated, 
they cling to their delusive hopes of safety. ‘The New Testament, 
like most of the later Greek, employs often the subjunctive aorist 
in the sense of the indicative future. W. § 60. 3; Lob. Phryn. 
p. 723 sq. morevonre need not be supposed to exemplify that 
usage here. 4, at the head of the clause, is a better reading than 
«6. That the dative, however, is not a false construction, see Rom. 


a 


10, 16. 
V. 42-49. They preach a second Time at Antioch. 


V. 42. The best editions insert at’réy in place of ék ris cvvayo- 
yiis Tay "Iovdaiey in the common text, and omit ra ¢@vn after wapexd- 
hovvy. —avréy must refer to the apostles. —eis rd peragd cd8Barov 
corresponds evidently to r@ éxouéve caBBdrm in v. 44: upon the 
next Sabbath (Neand., Mey., De Wet.) ; not during the intermedi- 
ate week, as explained by some of the older critics. 

V. 43. AvOeions ris cvvaywyjs seems, at first view, superfluous 
after éé:dvrev airév. The procedure, says Neander, may have 
been this. As Paul and Barnabas were going out before the gen- 
eral dispersion of the assembly, the rulers of the synagogue may 
have requested that they would repeat their discourse on the next 
Sabbath. The people having then withdrawn, many of the Jews 
and proselytes followed the speakers, for the purpose of declaring 
their assent to what they had heard, or of seeking further instruc- 
tion. — éreidov, sought to persuade; comp. 19, 8; 28, 23. B. 
§ 137. N. 10. — 79 xapuri rod beod, the grace of God, i. e. the gos- 
pel, which is the fruit of his undeserved favor. 

V. 44. cyeddv cuvnx6n, almost the entire city assembled ; where 
is not stated. Paul and Barnabas on that Sabbath may have spoken 
to different audiences. With such a concourse, not only the syna- 
gogue, but every avenue to it, must have been thronged; comp. 
Mark 2, 2 sq.; Luke 8, 19. 

V. 45. prov, with indignation, as in 5, 17.—drtideyorres is 
neither superfluous nor Hebraistic, but, like the participle united 
with its finite verb in the classics, emphasizes dyréXeyov (Mey.) : 





190 NOTES. [CHAP. XIII. 45 — 48. 


contradicting and blaspheming. 'The second participle expands 
the first, defines the extent or criminality of the act. W.§ 46. 10. 

V. 46. jy dvaykaiov, x. r. dX. It was necessary, because the plan 
of God required it; comp. on 3, 26.—kxai odk.... Cams, and ye 
judge yourselves not worthy of the eternal life, viz. which we 
preach ; see on 5, 20. This mode of speaking is not common; it 
rests on the just view that a man’s actions may be taken as his own 
self-pronounced verdict as to his character and deserts. — eis ra 
€Ovn, unto the heathen in that place. In like manner, the Jews 
whom they left to their doom were those at Antioch. They did 
not turn from the Jewish nation as such, to labor in future for the 
exclusive benefit of the Gentiles ; see 18, 5 sq.; 19, 8 sq. 

V.47. ovrw, so as they had done. — réOeca, x... See Is. 
49,6. The prophet announces there that the Messiah whom 
God promised to send would be the Saviour of the Gentiles as well 
as the Jews ; that all nations would be called to share in the bless- 
ings of his kingdom. The passage is quoted to show that in turn- 
ing now to the heathen they were merely carrying out the plan of 
God as revealed in the Old Testament (see also Is. 11, 1.10; Rom. 
9, 25 sq.) ; the announcement of his purpose in regard to the un- 
restricted design of the gospel required them as his messengers to 
publish it to the Gentiles. 

V. 48. eddfafov.... xupiov, they glorified, extolled, the word of 
the Lord; they expressed their joy and gratitude for the mercy 
which had embraced them in the plan of salvation, and had given 
them this opportunity to secure its benefits. — cal éwiorevoay .... 
aimnov, and they believed as many as (= those who) were appoint- 
ed unto eternal life. This is the only translation which the phi- 
lology of the passage allows. So Olshausen, Usteri, De Wette, 
Winer, Meyer, and others. See W. § 40. 3, marg. It does not 
mean as many as were disposed, i. e. mentally, inclined ; for 
though the Greek word may signify disposed externally, e. g. 
drawn up in military order, it was not employed, like that term in 
English, to denote an act of the mind. Mr. Humphry,* after 
Whitby and others, defends still that signification. He cites as 
proof of it, of 5€ mpds tO omrayynope teraypevr, from 2 Macc. 





* A Commentary on the Book of the Acts of the Apostles. By the 
Rev. William Gilson Humphry, Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge, 
&c. 1847. 


CHAP. XIII. 48—51.| NOTES. 191 


6,21, which he translates, ‘‘ those who were set or bent on mer- 
cy’; but the Greek there in full is of 8€ mpds 7 mapavdpo omday- 
xno Teraypévor, and means “ those who were appointed for the 
distribution of unlawful flesh”; so that the passage opposes their 
interpretation and confirms the other.* 

V. 49. dueépero .... xdpas, And the word of the Lord was con- 
veyed through all the region, i. e. in the vicinity of Antioch. This 
rapid extension of the gospel we must attribute in some measure to 
the zeal of the recent converts. 


V. 50-52. They are persecuted, and depart to Iconium. 


V. 50. rads ceBopuevas yuvaixas. ‘They were Gentile women who 
had embraced Judaism (see 17,4), and could be easily excited 
against a sect represented as hostile to their faith. edcy7jpovas refers 
to their rank (17, 12; Mark 15, 43). They were the wives of the 
chief men of the city ; and it was the object of the crafty Jews to 
gain the men through the influence of the women, and thus effect 
the expulsion of the apostles from the city. Paul alludes to this 
persecution in 2 Tim. 3, 11. 

V. 51. ew adro’s = eis papripioy én’ avrovs in Luke 9,5. Shak- 
ing off the dust of the feet imported disapprobation and rejection. 
The act derived its significancy from the idea that those renounced 
in this way were so unworthy that the very dust of their land was 
defilmg. In taking this course Paul followed the direction of 
Christ, given in Matt. 10, 14. — Iconium, to which they came next, 
was about forty-five miles southeast from Antioch. It was the 
principal city of Lycaonia, situated at the foot of the Taurus. Its 
present name is Konieh. Leake, who approached Iconium from 
the mountains which separate Antioch from Philomelium, says: 
“On the descent from a ridge branching eastward from these 
mountains, we came in sight of the vast plain around Konieh, and 
of the lake which occupies the middle of it; and we saw the city, 
with its mosques and ancient walls, still at the distance of twelve 
or fourteen miles from us.” + ‘ Konieh,” says another traveller, 
“extends to the east and south over the plain far beyond the 
walls, which are about two miles in circumference. Mountains 
covered with snow rise on every side, excepting towards the east, 





* See Biel’s Lexicon in LXX., Vol. III. p. 308. 
t Travels in Asia Minor, p, 45. 


192 NOTES. [CHAP. XIII, 51 — XIV. 5. 


where a plain as flat as the desert of Arabia extends far beyond the 
reach of the eye.” 

V. 52. of pabyrai, i. e. at Antioch, where the persecution still 
continued ; see 14, 22. The suggested idea is this: their new 
faith, though it called them to suffer, opened to them sources of 
consolation, which more than counterbalanced their trials. 





CHAPTER XIV. 


V.1-7. They preach at Iconium, but are persecuted and flee to 
Lystra. 


V. 1. xara rb adrd, together, like émi rd atro, in 8, 1. — kal Aad7- 
cat ovras, x. T.d., and they spake so, viz. with this effect, that (écre) 
a great multitude, etc. (Mey., De Wet.) ; not with such power that. 
ovras anticipates the next clause, and makes it more prominent. 
B. § 140. 4. —‘E\Ajver, Greeks, whose presence in the synagogue 
would indicate that they were proselytes ; comp. 13, 43. 

V.2. ékdkwoar, rendered evil, hostile. How the Jews produced 
this effect on the minds of the heathen we are not told. They 
sometimes alleged for that purpose that the Christians were dis- 
loyal, had a king of their own, would prove dangerous to the 
Roman supremacy ; see 18, 5-9. 

V. 3. ody, therefore, i.e. because they had so much success 
(see v. 1), notwithstanding the opposition excited against them. — 
ixavov xpovov would include, at least,some months. This is our 
only notice respecting the time spent at the places visited on this 
tour. — rappnovatdpevor emt ro Kvpio, speaking boldly upon the Lord, 
i. e. in dependence on him. It was their reliance on Christ that 
inspired them with so much courage. —'The best authorities omit 
kai before d:dévr. This participle defines the other: by.granting, 
causing that, etc. ; comp. 4, 30. | 

V. 4. 7d mdrqbos ris modews, the multitude of the city, i.e. the 
Gentile population. Some of them may have favored the christian 
party, without having attached themselves to it; comp. 19, 31.— 
avy Tois Iovdaiors, with the Jews, i. e. in sympathy, on their side; . 
see 5, 17. | 

V.5.  épyy, purpose, plot, lit. impulse ; see James 3, 4 (Whl., 


CHAP. XIV. 5, 6.] NOTES. 193 


Mey., De Wet.) ; not onset, for Paul and Barnabas escaped before 
their enemies could proceed so far. — ody tois dpxovow aitav, with 
their rulers, i. e. those of both nations, viz. the heathen magistrates 
and the officers of the synagogue. Some restrict avréy to the Gen- 
tiles, some to the Jews. Here,at this distance from Jerusalem, the 
members of the Sanhedrim could not be meant (Rob.). 

V.6. cumddvres, knowing, becoming aware of it (De Wet., 
Rob.). Meyer urges the preposition: knowing also, i. e. with those 
accessory to the plot who had failed to keep the secret to them- 
selves. — ArBoBodjoa adrovs. ‘* Once was | stoned,” says Paul, in 
2 Cor. 11, 25, which was the instance mentioned in v. 19. Hence, 
says Paley, “* had this meditated assault at Iconium been completed, 
had the history related that a stone was thrown, as it relates that 
preparations were made both by Jews and Gentiles to stone Paul 
and his companions, or even had the account of this transaction 
stopped, without going on to inform us that Paul and his com- 
panions were ‘aware of the danger and: fled,’ a contradiction be- 
tween the history and the Epistles would have ensued. ‘Truth is 
necessarily consistent; but it is scarcely possible that independent | 
accounts, not having truth to guide them, should thus advance to 
the very brink of contradiction without falling into it.” — rijs Avkao- 
vias. ‘The district of Lycaonia extends from the ridges of Mount 
Taurus and the borders of Cilicia, on the south, to the Cappadocian 
hills on the north. ‘It isa bare and dreary region, unwatered by 
streams, though in parts liable to occasional inundations. Across 
some portion of this plain Paul and Barnabas travelled, both before 
and after their residence in Iconium. After leaving the city the 
two most prominent objects still in view are the snowy mountains of 
Mount Argeeus, rising high above all the intervening hills in the di- : 
rection of Armenia, and the singular mass called the ‘ Kara-Dagh,’ 
or ‘ Black Mount,’ southeastwards in the direction of Cilicia. This 
latter mountain is gradually approached, and discovered to be an 
isolated mass, with beau of the plain SERENE round it like 
channels of the sea.’ 

Avotpay kat AépBnv. These cities were somewhere about the 
bases of the Black Mountain. Lystra is marked on Kiepert’s map 
as nearly south of Iconium, some twenty miles distant ; Derbe, as 
nearly east from Lystra, southeast from Iconium.* — kai ry repi- 





* The exact position, both of Lystra and Derbe, is subject still to some 


25 


194 NOTES. [CHAP. XIV. 6-9. 


xepov designates the country in the vicinity of the places just 
named. A few critics have proposed to extend the term so as to 
include even Galatia, and would thus assign an earlier origin to the 
churches in that country than it is usual to assign to them. ‘“ But 
mepixapov cannot denote an entire province, and still less the prov- 
ince of Galatia, on account of its geographical situation. Hence, 
the supposition that Paul preached the gospel to the Galatians on 
this first missionary tour is certainly to be rejected.” (Neand.) 
See the Note on 16, 6. 

V.'7.  xKdxei, and there, viz. in those cities and the adjacent re- 
gion. — foay evayyeAdrtsuevos implies that they pursued their labors 
here for some time. | 


V. 8-13. Paul heals a Lame Man at Lystra. 


V. 8. év Avorpos, at Lystra ; neuter plural, as in 2 Tim. 3. 11, 
but feminine singular in vy. 6, 21; 16, 1.— éxdOnro, sat (Str., 
Mey., De Wet.), because he was lame and had never walked ; 
others (Kuin., Rob.) dwelt, which is Hebraistic, and rare in the 
New Testament. — mepurenarnxet. Some editors write this pluper- 
fect with an augment, others without it. It is more correct to omit 
6 WS 2258 so $120, Re, 

V. 9. obros #eove, x. r.. The Jews at this place were proba- 





uncertainty. Kiepert appears to have followed Leake’s conjecture as to 
the situation of Lystra, though no traveller speaks of any ruins at that 
place. Very remarkable christian ruins are found at Bin-bir-Kilisseh, a few 
miles farther to the east, and Leake is of the opinion that these ruins mark 
the site of Derbe. Mr. Hamilton, on the contrary, thinks that they mark 
the site of Lystra, since they correspond better with the early ecclesiastical 
reputation of this city than with that of Derbe. He did not visit the spot 
where Kiepert represents Derbe, but inclines to believe that it is correctly 
chosen, since it occurs on a line of Roman road, and Divlé, the name of 
the modern town, resembles so nearly the ancient name. A recent travel- 
ler judges, that among the ruins at Bin-bir-Kilisseh, and on the adjacent 
heights, may be traced as many as forty churches, of a style of architecture 
which shows them to have belonged to an early age. 

Leake wrote thus in 1824: ‘ Nothing can more strongly show the little 
progress that has hitherto. been made in a knowledge of the ancient geog- 
raphy of Asia Minor, than that, of the cities which the journey of Paul 
has made so interesting to us, the site of Iconium only is yet certainly 
known. Perga, Antioch of Pisidia, Lystra, and Derbe remain to be dis- 
covered.’ The first two of these towns have since been identified. 


CHAP. XIV. 9-11.] NOTES. 195 


bly few, as no synagogue appears to have existed here. Hence 
the missionaries repaired to the market, or some other place of pub- 
lic resort (comp. 17, 17), and there entered into conversation with 
such as they could induce to listen to them. ‘The scene reminds us 
of the manner in which those who carry the same message of sal- 
vation to the heathen at the present day collect around them 
groups of listeners in Burmah or Hindostan. It was on one of these 
occasions, as Paul was preaching in some thoroughfare of the city, 
that the lame man heard him; his friends perhaps had placed him 
there to solicit alms (see 3, 10; John 9, 8). — ds drevicas, x. r. X., 
who looking intently upon him and seeing, viz. from the expression 
of his countenance, which Paul scrutinized with such rigor. The 
manner in which the participles follow each other directs us to this 
sense. Some think that the apostle may have had, at the moment, 
a supernatural insight into the state of the man’s heart. The 
language of the text contains no intimation of that nature. — rod 
coOjvac depends on wiotw, as a noun in the genitive (W. § 45. 
4. a): the faith of being healed may mean faith that the Saviour, 
whom Paul preached, was able to heal him ; or, which accords bet- 
ter with the mode of expression, faith such as made it proper that 
he should receive that benefit (see on 9, 33). The requisite de- 


* gree of faith would include, of course, a persuasion of Christ’s 


ability to bestow the favor in question. Paul may have been re- 
ferring in his remarks to the Saviour’s miracles of healing, in illus- 
tration of his readiness and power to bless those who confide in 
him. 

V.10. peyadyn ti porn. tH designates the voice as that of Paul ; 
see v. 11; 26,24. The adjective refers to the manner in which 
he exerted his voice, not to the power of it. The latter idea would 
have put peyddy between the article and noun, or after the noun 
with the article repeated. — dvdorn&, x. r.A.. Luke makes no men- 
tion here of any direct appeal to the name of Christ before the 
performance of the miracle. That omission may be owing to the 
brevity. of the record ; or the tenor of Paul’s discourse may have 
been so explicit in regard to the source of his authority, as to ren- 
der the usual invocation unnecessary. — jaro, leaped up, a single 
act. For this aorist, see W. § 15; K. § 149. R. 2. #dXero oc- 
curs in some copies, but has no adequate support. The next verb 
passes to the imperfect, because it expresses a repeated act. 

V. 11. of dydo, k. r. A. Their conduct shows how imperfectly 


196 NOTES. [cHAP XIV. 11—13. 


they had understood the address of Paul, and the object of the 
miracle. ‘They saw nothing beyond what was present and palpa- 
ble ; they confounded the instrument of the work with its author, — 
5 éxoinoev, what he had done ; see on 1, 2. — Avkaonari, in Lycaonic, 
i. e. the native dialect of the province. What that dialect was it is 
impossible to say. No relic of it has been preserved, or at least 
identified ; no description of it has been handed down. Those 
who have taken up the question differ in their conclusions. Ac- 
cording to one opinion, the Lycaonic was allied to the Assyrian ; 
according to another, it was a corrupt species of Greek.* There 
are no reliable data for any opinion. Luke mentions that the Lys- 
trians spoke in their native tongue, that we may know why the mul- 
titude proceeded so far in their design before Paul and Barnabas in- 
terposed to arrest it. In conferring with the people, they had used, 
doubtless, the Greek, which formed at that period an extensive 
medium of intercourse between those of different nations. 

V. 12. Aia, ‘Eppjv. ‘They fixed upon these gods because Jupi- 
ter had a temple there, and Mercury, who appeared in the pagan 
mythology as his attendant, excelled in eloquence. So Ovid. Met. 
8. 626: 


Jupiter huc specie mortali cumque parente 
Venit Atlantiades positis caducifer alis. 


See also Hor. Od. 1. 10. 1-5. Some suggest, as a further motive 
for this distribution of parts, that Barnabas may have been an older 
man than Paul, and more imposing in his personal appearance 
(comp. 2 Cor. 10, 1. 10). —6 jyovpevos rob Adyou, he who leads the 
discourse, ** chief speaker.” 

V. 13. 6 iepevs, the priest, i.e. the principal one, or the one 
most active. No doubt there were others. — rod Avds, x. r. d., of 
Jupiter who was before the city, i. e. who had a statue and temple 
there consecrated to him. ‘The temple of the tutelary god stood 
often outside of the walls. — oréupara, garlands, which were to 
adorn the victims, and perhaps the priest and the altar (De Wet.). 
See Jahn’s Archeol. § 401. 5. They had the garlands in readiness, 
but had not applied them to their intended use (Mey.). Many con- 
nect this noun with the preceding by hendiadys (De Wet., Rob.) : 
bullocks adorned with garlands. éoreupévovs would have expressed 





* Jablonsky and Gihling, who wrote largely on the subject, arrived at 
the results stated above. (See Win. Realw. II. p. 37.) 


es 
ee 
_ algo A eee 


CE hg ee See ae ee ee 


CHAP. XIV. 13—15.] NOTES. 197 


that sense more directly.—éml rods muddvas, unto the gates of the 
city (Neand., Rob.), or of the house where the apostles were 
(Olsh., De Wet., Mey.). The former is grammatically more cor- 
rect, as rédews precedes, and is better, because the term is plural. 
— 70cere Ovew, was about to sacrifice. Oédw, or éOé\o, may accom- 
pany the infinitive to express an act on the point of being per- 
formed. Mt. § 498. e; C. § 583. 


V. 14-18. The Speech of Paul to the Lystrians. 


V. 14. dkotcarres, having heard, i. e. a report of what was tak- 
ing place. — dappygavres ta indria aitév, having rent their gar- 
ments, i. e., according to the Jewish custom, from the neck in front 
down towards the girdle. See Jahn’s Archeol. 211. The Jews 
and other nations performed this act as an expression of sorrow, 
and also of abhorrence on hearing or seeing any thing which they 
regarded as impious. iudria may refer to the plural subject of the 
verb, but more probably to their outer and inner garments; comp. 
Matt. 26, 65. — e£emndnoar cis rov dxdov, sprang forth unto the mul- 
titude, 1. e. from the house, which could be said whether the people 
had collected in the street or at the entrance of the city. éé in the 
verb, therefore, does not settle the question in regard to émt rods 
mudavas. The English translation, “ran in among them,” rests 
upon eicempdnoav, now a rejected reading. 

V. 15. «ai connects what is said with what was in the mind: 
You are men; and we are men like constituted with you. Passing 
over the first clause, the speaker hastens at once to the main 
thought. déyowraéeis means that they had the same nature, pas- 
sions, infirmities. — edayyeAif{opevor, declaring to you as glad ti- 
dings, viz. that they should renounce their idolatry. The requisi- 
tion is characterized in this manner, because it was founded on 
the fact that God had provided a way in the gospel in which he 
could accept their repentance. ipas answers here to the dative, as 
in 8, 25. — dré rovray tay paraiwv, from these vanities, nonentities, 
such as Jupiter, Mercury, and the like. rovrey points back to those 
names. Paul and Barnabas had heard in what light the populace 
looked upon them. paraiwy does not require dedv. It is used like 
p°227, 0°21, which the Hebrews applied to the gods of the heathen 
as having no real existence; comp. 1 Cor. 8, 4. Kuinoel takes 
paraioy abstractly: vain practices, idolatry; which destroys the 
evident opposition between the term and ray Oedy tov tévra. — és 
erxoinge, k. t. A. ‘This relative clause unfolds the idea of ¢évra. 


< 


198 NOTES. [cHAP. XIV. 16-19. 


V. 16. lace, left them, withdrew the restraints of his grace and 
providence ; comp. on 7, 42 and 17, 30. In Rom. 1, 28, the 
apostle brings to view other connections of this fact. 'The reason 
why God abandoned the heathen was that they first abandoned him. 


— mopeverOaui rais dois aitav, to walk (see on 9,31) in their own . 


ways; dative of rule or manner. dois includes belief and conduct. 

V.17. xairovye .... apnxerv, although indeed he left himself 
not without witness. "The desertion on the part of God was not 
such as to destroy the evidence of their dependence on him, and 
their consequent obligation to know and acknowledge him. The 
apostle’s object does not lead him to press them with the full conse- 
quences of this truth, It lies at the foundation of his argument 
for proving the accountability of the heathen, in Rom. 1, 19 sq. 
See also 17, 27 sq. — dyaborodv, didovs, éumumAGv, are epexegetical 
of dyudprupov, but the second participle specifies a mode of the first, 
and the third a consequence of the second. — tiv after ovpavdder is 
the correct reading (Grsb., Lachm., Mey.), instead of the received 
jpiv. — tpopis, with food, including the idea of the enjoyment af- 
forded by such fruits of the divine bounty. With that accessory 
idea, rpopjs is not incongruous with xapdias, and still less is capdias 
ipa a circumlocution for dyas (Kuin.). See W. § 22. R.5. The 
common text has jueéy, followed in the English version. 

V. 18. rod pi Ovew adrois states the result of xaréravoay, not the 
object : so that they should not, did not, sacrifice to them. See the 
Note on 10, 47. — It is interesting to compare this speech at Lystra 
with the train of thought which Paul has developed in Rom. 1, 
19 sq. It will be seen that the germ of the argument there may 
be traced distinctly here. The similarity is precisely such as we 
should-expect on the supposition that he who wrote the Epistle de- 
livered the speech. ‘The diversity in the different prominence given 
to particular ideas is that which arises from applying the same sys- 
tem of truth to different occasions. 


V. 19-28. They proceed to Derbe; and then retrace their Way 
to Antioch in Syria. 


V.19. rovs éxydous. They were mostly heathen (see on v. 9) ; 
but that some Jews resided at Lystra is evident from 16, 1. — 
AOdcavres. The nature of the outrage indicates that the Jews not 
only originated this attack, but controlled the mode of it. Stoning 
was a Jewish punishment. In the present instance, it will be ob- 








CHAP. XIV. 19-2I.] NOTES. 199 


served, they had no scruple about shedding the blood of their vic- 
tim in the city. It was otherwise at Jerusalem; see on 7,58. An 
incidental variation like this attests the truth of the narrative. 

V.20. kuk\oodvrov Sé airév rév pabnrav. Here we learn inciden- 
tally that their labors had not been ineffectual. Kuinoel decides too 
much when he says that the disciples collected around Paul in order 
to bury him; it may have been to lament over him, or to ascer- 
tain whether he was really dead. In that sorrowing circle stood 
probably the youthful Timothy, the apostle’s destined associate in 
so many future labors and perils; see 16, 1; 2 Tim. 3, 11.— 
dvaotds, K. T.X. vouioavres avrov rebvava, in Vv. 19, having supposed 
that he was dead, would not incline us to regard this as an instance 
of actual restoration to life. The apostle’s sudden recovery after 
such an outrage, enabling him to return to the city and on the next 
day to resume his journey, may with more reason be considered as 
miraculous. Paul alludes to this stoning in 2 Cor. 11, 25. — es 
AépBnv. A few hours would be sufficient for the journey from 
Lystra to this place. We have now reached the eastern limit of 
the present expedition. 

Vz. 21. padnretoarres ixavois, having made many disciples (Matt. 
28, 19) ; not instructed them merely, which was said in the pre- 
ceding clause. One of the converts was probably Gaius, who is 
called a Derbean in 20,4. Their labors in this city appear to have 
been unattended by any open opposition. Hence, in 2 Tim. 3, 11, 
Paul omits Derbe from the list of places associated in the mind of 
Timothy with the “ persecutions, afflictions,” which he had been 
called to endure. Paley refers to that omission as a striking in- 
stance of conformity between the Epistle and the Acts. ‘In the 
apostolic history Lystra and Derbe are commonly mentioned to- 
gether; in 2 Tim. 3, 11, Antioch, Iconium, Lystra, are mentioned, 
and not Derbe. And the distinction will appear on this occasion to 
be accurate ; for Paul in that passage is enumerating his persecu- 
tions, and although he underwent grievous persecutions in each of 
the three cities through which he passed to Derbe, at Derbe itself 
he met with none. The Epistle, therefore, in the names of the 
cities, in the order in which they are enumerated, and in the place 
at which the enumeration stops, corresponds exactly with the his- 
tory. Nor is there any just reason for thinking the agreement to 
be artificial ; for had the writer of the Epistle sought a coincidence 
with the history upon this head, and searched the Acts of the Apos- 


200 NOTES. [CHAP. XIV. 21— 23. 


tles for the purpose, I conceive he would have sent us at once to 
Philippi and Thessalonica, where Paul suffered persecution, and 
where, from what is stated, it may easily be gathered that ‘Timothy 
accompanied him, rather than have appealed to persecutions as 
. known to Timothy, in the account of which persecutions Timothy’s 
presence is not mentioned ; it not being till after one entire chap- 
ter, and in the history of a journey three or four years subsequent 
to this (16, 1), that Timothy’s name occurs in the Acts of the 
Apostles for the first time.’ —timéorpepav. “In this part of the 
Lycaonian plain, which approaches through gradual undulations to 
the northern bases of Mount Taurus, they were not far from the 
well-known ‘ Cilician Gates,’ which led down from the central 
table-land to Cilicia and Tarsus.” They could have returned to 
Syria, therefore, by a nearer way; but their solicitude for the wel- 
fare of the newly founded churches constrains them to turn pik 
and revisit the places where they had preached. 

V. 22. émuornpitovres, x. r. X., confirming the souls of the disci- 
ples, not by any outward rite, but by instruction and encourage- 
ment, as we see in the next clause ; comp. 15, 32. 41; 18, 23. — 
éupevew th miore, to adhere to the faith (see 6, 7; 13, 8), i. e. of 
Christ or the gospel; comp. 3, 16; 20, 21, etc. — ér: depends on 
mapakadoovres, Which, at this point of the sentence, passes to the 
idea of affirming, teaching. — dei may mean it is necessary, be- 
cause such was the appointment of God (9, 16; 1 Cor. 15, 25); 
or because in the nature of things it was inevitable (comp. 2 ‘Tim. 
3, 12). The first is the more pertinent view, since it presents a 
stronger motive to submission and fidelity in the endurance of 
trials. — jas, we who are Christians; comp. 1 Thess. 4, 17.— 
ri Bacidelay rod Geov, i. e. the state of happiness which awaits the 
redeemed in heaven. ‘The expression can have no other meaning 
here, for those addressed were already members of Christ’s visible 
kingdom, and the perseverance to which the apostles would incite 
them must have reference to the attainment of a future good. 

V. 23. yewporovioavres, x. t X., Now having appointed for them 
elders in every church. xeporoveiv signifies properly to elect or 
vote by extending the hand, but also, in a more general sense, to 
choose, appoint, without reference to that formality. That formal- 
ity could not have been observed in this instance, as but two indi- 
viduals performed the act in question. When the verb retains the 
idea of stretching forth the hand, the act is predicated always of 


ee et ee em 


i en bers dink td - = =" = 
Ee a eT ey eee ll tees ere 


CHAP. XIV. 23.] NOTES. : 201 


the subject of the verb, not of those for whom the act may be per- 
formed. Hence the interpretation having appointed for them by 
their outstretched hands, i. e. by taking their opinion or vote in 
that manner, is unwarranted; for it transfers the hands to the 
wrong persons. Whether Paul and Barnabas appointed the presby- 
ters in this case by their own act solely, or ratified a previous elec- 
tion of the churches made at their suggestion, is disputed. If it be 
clear from other sources that the primitive churches elected their 
officers by general suffrage, the verb here may be understood to 
denote a concurrent appointment, in accordance with that practice ; 
but the burden of proof lies on those who contend for such a modi- 
fication of the meaning. 

Neander sums up his conclusion on this subject as follows: ‘** As 
regards the election to church offices, we are in want of sufficient 
information to enable us to decide how it was managed in the early 
apostolic times. Indeed, it is quite possible that the method of pro- 
cedure differed under different circumstances. As in the institution 
of deacons the apostles left the choice to the communities them- 
selves, and as the same was the case in the choice of deputies to 
attend the apostles in the name of the communities (2 Cor. 8, 19), 
we might argue that a similar course would be pursued in filling 
other offices of the church. Yet it may be that in many cases the 
apostles themselves, where they could not as yet have sufficient 
confidence in the spirit of the first new communities, conferred the 
important office of presbyters on such as in their own judgment, un- 
der the light of the Divine Spirit, appeared to be the fittest persons. 
Their choice would, moreover, deserve, in the highest degree, the 
confidence of the communities (comp. 14, 23 ; Tit. 1,5); although, 
when Paul empowers Titus to set presiding officers over the com- 
munities who possessed the requisite qualifications, this circum- 
stance decides nothing as to the mode of choice, nor is a choice by 
the community itself thereby necessarily excluded. The regular 
course appears to have been this: the church offices were intrusted 
to the first converts in preference to others, provided that in other 
respects they possessed the requisite qualifications. It may have 
been the general practice for the presbyters themselves, in case of a 
vacancy, to propose another to the community in place of the per- 
son deceased, and leave it to the whole body either to approve or de- 
cline their selection for reasons assigned. (Clem. cap. 44.) When 
asking for the assent of the community had not yet become a mere 

26 


202 NOTES. [CHAP. XIV. 23-25, 


formality, this mode of filling church offices had the salutary effect 
of causing the votes of the majority to be guided by those capable 
of judging, and of suppressing divisions ; while, at the same time, 
no one was obtruded on the community who would not be-welcome 
to their hearts.”” Ch. Hist., Vol. I. p. 189. 

mpeoBurépous is plural, because each church had its college of 
elders (see 20, 17; Tit. 1,5); not because there was a church in 
each of the cities. The elders, or presbyters, in the official sense 
of the term, were those appointed in the first churches to watch 
over their general discipline and welfare. With reference to that 
duty, they were called, also, émicxomo, i. e. superintendents, or 
bishops. The first was their Jewish appellation, transferred to 
them perhaps from the similar class of officers in the synagogues ; 
the second was their foreign appellation, since the Greeks employed 
it to designate such relations among themselves. In accordance 
with this distinction, we find the general rule to be this: those who 
are called elders in speaking of Jewish communities are called 
bishops in speaking of Gentile communities. Hence the latter 
term is the prevailing one in Paul’s Epistles. That the names with 
this difference were entirely synonymous, appears from their inter- 
change in such passages as 20, 17. 28, and Tit. 1,5. 7. It may 
be argued, also, from the fact that in Phil. 1,1 and 1 Tim. 3, 1.8 
the deacons are named immediately after the bishops, which ex- 
cludes the idea of any intermediate order. Other appellations 
given to these officers were mowpéves, jyovpevor, mpoeotares tev adeh- 
dav. The presbyters, or bishops, were not by virtue of their office 
teachers or preachers at the same time; nor, on the other hand, 
were the two spheres of labor incompatible with each other. We 
see from 1 Tim. 5, 17, that some of those who exercised the gen- 
eral oversight preached also the word; comp. also 1 Tim. 3, 2. 
The foregoing representation exhibits the view of Mosheim, Nean- 
der, Gieseler, Rothe, and others eminent in such inquiries. — 
mpocevéduevoe belongs to the following verb, not to the subordinate 
clause which precedes. — avrovs is defined by eis ov memorevKeiar, 
and must refer to the believers in general, not to the elders merely. 

V. 24. StedOdvres riv Uvoidiay. Antioch was on the northern 
limit of Pisidia, and hence they traversed that district from north to 
south. Their journey was a descent from the mountains to the plain. 

V. 25. é Ilépyy. They now preached in this city, as they had 
not done on their first visit; see on 13, 18. Luke’s silence may 


Sz > *. — -. 
ee ee ee 


CHAP. XIV. 25-28] NOTES. 203 


intimate that they were favored with no marked success. — eis 
*Arrddecav. Instead of embarking at Perga, and sailing down the 
Cestrus, which they had ascended on their arrival from Cyprus, 
they proceeded across the plain to Attaleia, a seaport on the Pam- 
phylian Gulf. For the distance, see on 13, 13. The founder of 
this city was Attalus Philadelphus, king of Pergamus. — It occupied 
the site of the modern Satalia} which Admiral Beaufort describes 
*‘ as beautifully situated round a small harbor, the streets appearing 
to rise behind each other, like the seats of a theatre,.... with a 
double wall and a series of square towers on the level summit of 
the hill.” 

V. 26. Sev joav, x. r. d., stands in sensu pregnanti for whence, 
having been committed to the favor of God, they were sent forth; 
see 13,3. W.{§ 58. '7.— cis rd epyov, for the work, i. e. for its per- 
formance. | 

V.27. é0a.... per airév, how great things God had done 
with them, i. e. in their behalf (15,4; Luke 1, 72); not by them, 
which would be expressed as in 15, 12. The phrase comes from 
oy nvy; comp. Josh. 2, 12; Ps. 119, 65, ete. According to 
Meyer, per atrav is = dv per adray, allied with them, which is 
forced. — ri #vorEe, x. tr. X., that he had opened to the Gentiles a 
door of faith, i. e. had given them access to the gospel, participa- 
tion in its blessings, as well as to the Jews ; not that he had opened 
to the apostles a door of access to the heathen. 

V. 28. diérpiBov, x. 7. A. It is necessary to inquire here how 
long the apostle was probably absent on the tour followed by this 
residence at Antioch. We must accept a somewhat indefinite 
answer to this question. The Apostolic Council at Jerusalem was 
held in A. D. 50 (Introd. § 3. 3); and as Paul departed on his 
first mission in 45 (see on 13, 3), we must divide the interval from 
45 to 50 between his journey among the heathen and his subse- 
quent abode at Antioch. The best authorities, as Anger, Wieseler, 
Meyer, Winer, De Wette, and others, agree in this result. How 
we are ‘to distribute the intermediate years is more uncertain. It 
will be found that the apostle travelled more extensively during his 
second missionary tour than during the first ; and as the limitations 
of time in that part of the history allow us to assign but three 
years, or three and a half, to that excursion, we may consider two 
years perhaps as sufficient for this journey. This conclusion would 
place the return to Antioch near the close of A. D. 47; since the 


204 NOTES. [CHAP. XIV. 28—Xv. 2. 


apostle must have set forth somewhat late in the year 45. Com- 
pare the Note on 12, 25 with that on 18,3. Accordingly, the 
years 48 and 49 would be the period not brief (xpédvov ovk driyor) 
which Paul and Barnabas spent at Antioch between their return and 
the Council at Jerusalem. While they resided in that city, for the 
most part, they would be able, both by their own personal efforts 
and their supervision of the efforts of others, to extend the gospel in 
the regions around them. ) 





CHAPTER XV. 


V.1-6. Paul and Barnabas are sent as Delegates to Jerusalem. 


V. 1. dd ris “Iovdaias, i. e. from Jerusalem in Judea; comp. 
rwes e& huav in vy. 24. It is barely possible that Luke may include 
the other churches in that country. — 67 éav,x. 7. A. This transi- 
tion to the direct style gives vividness to the narrative. —7@ Oe, ac- 
cording to the custom, law (see 6, 14) ; dative of rule or manner. 
— The doctrine in question was subversive of the true method of 
salvation. It originated in the feeling that circumcision was an act 
of merit, and that those who submitted to it acquired a virtual right 
to the divine favor. In other words, it substituted the law of works 
for the gratuitous justification which the gospel declares to be the 
only way in which sinners can be saved. 

V.2. ordcews, dissension in their views; (nrncews, discussion 
on the points which that difference involved. — édzyns belongs to 
both nouns (De Wet.). It connects itself with the last, because 
that contains the main idea. W. § 35. 2. When the adjective 
precedes the noun, the rule is different; see on 2, 48. — avrovs re- 
fers to rwés in v. 1. Paul and Barnabas were the disputants on one 
side, and the individuals from Judea on the other. It does not appear 
that the Christians at Antioch took any open part in the contro- 
versy. The heresy reappeared among them at a later period, and 
became then so prevalent as to endanger the safety of the entire 
church ; see Gal. 2, 11 sq. Even Barnabas, at that time, com- 
promised the principle for which he was now so earnest. — éragar, 
x. T. X., they (i. e. the brethren in v. 1) appointed that they should go 
up, etc. It appears from Gal. 2, 2, that Paul went also in compliance 


Pe ee ee 


CHAP. XV. 2-5.| NOTES. 205 


with a divine command. Whether the revelation was first, and the 
action of the church subsequent, or the reverse, it is impossible to 
say. It may be that Paul was instructed to propose the mission to 
Jerusalem ; or, if the measure originated with the church, that he 
was instructed to approve it, and to go as one of the delegates. 
Either supposition harmonizes the notice in Gal. 2, 2 with this pas- 
sage.— was GAdovs. One of them, as some think, may have been 
Titus, for he accompanied the apostle at this time ; see Gal. 2, 1. 
Others infer from cvprapadaBov kai Tirov, in that place, that Paul 
may have taken Titus merely as a friend, that he was not joined 
with him as an official associate. ‘The fact, too, that, being uncir- 
cumcised, he was a party in some sense to this Jewish question, 
may have disqualified him for such an appointment. 

V. 3. of pev ody mporeppberres, They having been sent forward, 
i. e. attended part of the way by some of the church, as a mark of 
honor; comp. 20, 38; 21, 5; 3 John v. 6. The word, says 
Meyer, does not include the viatica, or supplies for the journey, 
unless the context point that out as a part of the service rendered, 
as in Tit. 3, 18.— dujpxovro, x. r.A. Phoenicia lay along the sea 
south of Syria, so that they would pass thence through Galilee 
into Samaria and Judea.—rois ddeAdois, to the brethren in the 
various towns on their way. 

V. 4. dedéxOnoav, were cordially received ; comp. 18, 27. It 
was not certain that, coming on such an errand, they would be 
greeted with entire favor. It weakens the sense to restrict it to 
their official recognition as messengers. This was the apostle’s 
third visit to Jerusalem since his conversion, and was made in the 
year 50 (Introd. § 6. 3). —rijs exkAnoias, the church in general, 
while xai adds the prominent parts; see on 1, 14. The existence 
of presbyters at Jerusalem is first recognized in 11, 30. Luke 
does not inform us at what time, or in what- manner, they were 
appointed. It was evidently no part of his intention to unfold any 
particular scheme of ecclesiastical polity. The information which 
he gives: on that subject is incidental and imperfect. — per avray, 
towards them, in their behalf; see on 14, 27. 

V.5. éavéornoay, x. tr. X., But there arose (in the assembly at 
Jerusalem) some of those from the sect of the Pharisees. It is en- 
tirely natural that individuals of this class appear as the party who 
insist on circumcision. ‘The attachment to forms, which rendered 
them Pharisees out of the church, rendered them legalists in it. — 


206 NOTES. [cHar. xv. 5-7. 


avrovs, them, viz. the Gentile believers brought to view in the com- 
munication just made (vy. 4). — Some regard this verse as a part of 
the narrative which precedes ; but such a transition to the direct 
style in dérc Set, «. 7. A.. would be strangely abrupt, and, still more, 
é€avéornoay would then convey the false idea that the objectors be- 
longed to the church at Antioch ; see v. 1. 


V. 6-12. Speech of Peter in the Assembly. 


V. 6. ovvqxOnocay, x. rr. This assembly is often called the 
first Christian Council; but we need some license to apply the term 
in that way, since a council consists properly of delegates from 
various churches, whereas two churches only were represented on 
this occasion. The apostles and elders are mentioned on account 
of their rank. It is evident from v. 23, that the other Christians at 
Jerusalem were also present, and gave their sanction to the decrees 
enacted; see also v. 12, compared with v. 22. — In Gal. 2, 2, Paul 
states that, besides the communication which he made to the be- 
lievers in a body, he had also a private interview with the chief of 
the apostles. That interview, we may suppose, preceded the pub- 
lic discussion, ‘The object of it appears to have been, to put the 
other apostles in full possession of his views, and of all the facts in 
relation to his ministry among the heathen; so that, fortified by 
their previous knowledge of the case, he might have their support 
in the promiscuous assembly, where prejudice or misunderstanding 
might otherwise have placed him in a false light. — Aéyov rovrov, 
this matter (De Wet.). Meyer refers it to v. 5, this expression ; 
but the dispute had an earlier origin. 

V.'7. ap npepav dpxaier, since remote days, a long time ago; 
comp. év dpxf in 11, 15. The conversion of Cornelius took place 
during the time that Paul was at Tarsus (see on 11, 15); and the 
several years, so eventful in their character, which had elapsed since 
that period, would appear in the retrospect a long time.—éy jyiv 

. ordpards pov, made choice among us (the apostles) that by 
my mouth, etc. (Mey., De Wet. Win.) W. § 32.3. The 
subsequent clause forms the proper object of é&edc£aro. Some 
(Olsh.) supply eye, selected me. ‘The meaning is not necessarily 
that no heathen had heard or embraced the gospel till he preached 
it to them ; but that it was he whom God appointed to convey the 
gospel to them under circumstances which showed it to be mani- 
festly his will that they should be admitted into the church without 
circumcision. — For the generic ¢4yn, see on 11, 18. 


CHAP. XV. 8—10.} NOTES. 207 


V.8. 6 xapdoyvdaorns.... abrois, the heart-knowing God (who 
could judge, therefore, of the sincerity of their repentance and 
faith) testified for them (dat. comm.). The testimony consisted of 
the miraculous gifts which he imparted to them, see 10,45. He 
had thus shown that ceremonial obedience was not essential to his 
favor; for he had granted the sign of acceptance to those who 
were entirely destitute of that recommendation. 

V.9. Kai oddév.... adrav, and made no distinction between us, 
who had practised the Jewish rites, and them, though they were still 
heathen in that respect (dvouo, 1 Cor. 9,21). The next clause 
states how he had manifested this impartiality.— 77 miote.... 
avrav, in that by faith he purified their hearis, i. e. in connection 
with their reception of the gospel, had made them pastakers of the 
holiness which renders those who possess it acceptable in his sight. 
He had bestowed this blessing as fully and freely on the uncircum- 
cised believing Gentiles, as he had upon the circumcised believing 
Jews. Peter represents the purification as effected by faith, in or- 
der to deny the error which would ascribe that efficacy to circum- 
cision or any other legal observance. ‘The Jewish feeling was that 
the heathen were unclean so long as they were uncircumcised. 
The Spirit is the efficient author of sanctification ; but faith as used 
here is a belief of the truth (2 Thess. 2, 13), especially of that 
which relates to the atonement of Christ (1 John 1,'7), and the 
Spirit employs the truth as the means of sanctification. 

V. 10. viv ob», Now therefore, i. e. after such evidence that 
God does not require the heathen to submit to Jewish rites. — ri 
meipacere tov Oeov, why do ye tempt God, make presumptuous trial of 
his power and patience by demanding new proofs of his will; see 
Matt. 4,7; 1 Cor. 10,9. To obtain the full idea, we must com- 
pare this verb with 7101. — émOcivas (— émiOévres) (vydv, that you 
should place (= by placing) a yoke, ete. This isa lax use of the 
epexegetical infinitive. W.{% 45. 3.— dy otre, x.7.d. “ By this 
yoke,” says Neander, “ which Peter represents as having been al- 
ways so irksome to the Jews, he certainly did not mean the exter- 
nal observance of ceremonies simply as such, since he would by no 
means persuade the Jewish Christians to renounce them. But he 
meant the external observance of the law, in so far as this pro- 
ceeded from an internal subjection of the conscience to its power, 
such as exists when justification and salvation are made to depend on 
the performance of legal requirements. Those in this state of mind 


208 NOTES. [CHAP. Xv. 10-15. 


must fear lest they peril their salvation by the slightest deviation 
from the law; they suffer the painful scrupulosity which leads to 
the invention of manifold checks, in order to guard them, by a self- 
imposed constraint, against every possible transgression of its com- 
mands,” 

V.11. dddd marks this connection: With such an experience 
as to the law, we no longer expect salvation from that source ; but 
through the grace of the Lord Jesus believe that we shall be saved. 
— xdxeivor, also they, viz. the heathen converts. The remark sug- 
gests its own application. If the Jews had renounced their own 
law as unable to benefit them, and had taken the position of the 
Gentiles, it was inconsistent, as well as useless, to require the Gen- 
tiles to depend on the system of the Jews. The train of thought 
in Gal. 2, 15 sq. is singularly coincident with this. — The reference 
of xdxeivor to of marépes introduces an idea irrelevant to the subject. 

V. 12. éolynoe recalls us to the wodAjs ovnraceas in v. 7. 
Peter’s address had calmed the excitement, so that they refrained 
from speaking, and gave Paul and Barnabas an opportunity to be 
heard; comp. ovyjoa in the next verse. — éényoupévar, x. T. dr. 
They gave this prominence to the miracles because these expressed 
so decisively God’s approval of their course in receiving the heathen 
without circumcision. ‘That was now the main point in question. 
We see from Gal. 2, 7 sq., that the narrative embraced also other 
topics. | 


V. 13-21. Speech of the Apostle James. 


V. 13. The speaker is the James mentioned in 12, 1'7.— dre- 
xpidn, addressed them; see 3, 12. 

V. 14. Supedy, as in 2 Pet. 1, 1; elsewhere Sinev, after the Heb. 
variation }in°Y (1 Chr. 4,20) and ;ynw (Gen. 29,33). — mparov, at 
Jirst, answers to dd’ qpepay dpxaiwy in v. '7. — émeckewparo, graciously 
visited, like 12 in its good sense. — ént 76 évépart abrod, after his 
name (Luke 1, 59), i.e. who should be called by it, known as his 
people (De Wet.) ; comp. v. 17; Deut. 28, 10; Is. 63,19; 2 Chr. 
7, 14, etc. But the critical editions omit éri, and the dative de- 
pends then on the infinitive ; i. e. for thy name, its acknowledgment, 
honor. 

V. 15, Kat rovr@, x. r. d., and with this (not masculine, viz. 
Peter, but neuter, viz. the fact just stated) agree the words of the 


prophets. As an example of their testimony, he adduces Am. 
9, 11 sq. 


CHAP. XV. 16, 17.] NOTES. 209 


V.16. The citation conforms very nearly to the Septuagint. — 
dvaotpia, x. tT. X., I will return and will rebuild. The expression 
implies a restoration of favor after a temporary alienation ; comp. 
Jer. 12, 15. Some recognize here the Hebraism which converts 
the first of two verbs into an adverb qualifying the second: J will 
again rebuild. Meyer, De Wette, Winer (§ 58. 5), reject that ex- 
planation. It is the less apposite here, as dva repeats the adverbial 
idea in the three following verbs. — dvoixodopjow, x.t.r. To re- 
build the tabernacle of David means to restore the decayed splen- 
dor of his family, i. e. in the person of his Son after the flesh 
(Rom. 1, 3), the Messiah. oxnynv represents the family as having 
fallen into such obscurity as to occupy the humble abode of a 
booth or tabernacle. The next words describe the same condi- 
tion still more strongly. 

V.17. das adv éxfntnowow, k. Tt. d., that (telic, because the Sav- 
iour must be first sent) ¢he rest of men and all the heathen may 
seek the Lord. dy implies that it depends on them whether the 
purpose will be attained or defeated. See W. § 43. 6; K. § 330. 4. 
— The rest of men are the others of them besides the Jews, and 
these others are all thé heathen. ‘The last clause is explica- 
tive, not appositional. The Hebrew has they, i.e. the people of 
God, shall possess the residue of Edom, i.e. those of Edom re- 
served for mercy, and all the (other) heathen. The Seventy may 
have confounded some of the original words with other similar 
words ; but the apostle followed their translation of the passage, as 
it contained the essential idea for which he appealed to it. The 
many foreign Jews who were present were familiar with the Greek 
Scriptures, but not the Hebrew. — é@’ ods .... pov, upon whom my 
name has been called, i. e. given, applied to them as a sign of their 
relationship to God; comp. James 2, 7. See the references on 
v. 14. Observe that the verb is perfect. The application of the 
name was future when the prophecy was uttered, and was still fu- 
ture to a great extent when cited at this time; but the prediction 
was as good as already verified, because the purpose of God made 
it certain. — én’ adrods is a Hebraism, founded on the use of WN as 
the sign of relation (Olsh., De Wet., Mey.). Gesen. Heb. Gr. 
§ 121.1. The foregoing citation from Amos was pertinent in a 
twofold way: first, it announced that the heathen were to be ad- 
mitted with the Jews into the kingdom of Christ; and, secondly, 
it contained no recognition of circumcision, or other Jewish cere- 
monies, as prerequisite to their reception. 

27 


210 NOTES. [cHAP. xv. 18-20. 


V.18. yvoora....atrod. The present call of the Gentiles, 
after having been so long foretold, was an evidence and illustration 
of the truth here asserted. Hence, the apostle would argue, if God, 
in extending the gospel to the heathen without requiring them to be 
circumcised, was carrying into effect an eternal purpose, it be- 
came them to acquiesce in it; their opposition to his plan would be 
as unavailing as it was criminal. — The variations of the text in 
this verse are verbal, and do not affect the sense; see them in 
Griesbach, Hahn, and others. Lachmann adheres to the common 
reading, with the exception of xupio for 6ep, and epyoy for epya. 

V.19. eye kpivo, I (for my part) judge, decide as my opinion. 
On éye, see W. § 22.6. The verb affords no proof that the speak- 
er’s authority was greater than that of the other apostles. — py) ma- 
pevoxreiv, that we ought not (W. § 45. 2. b) to disquiet, molest, i. e. 
impose on them the yoke of Jewish ceremonies ; see v.10. Meyer 
urges the separate force of mapa, further, i. e. in addition to their 
faith; but the usage does not warrant this. 

V. 20. émioreiha, x. r. ., that we should write to them, direct 
by letter, that they abstain. For the infinitive with rod to express 
a command or purpose, see W. § 45. 4. b; K.§ 308. 2. b. — 
dwrynparov = eidodobvray in v.29. The parts of the victim not 
used in sacrifice, the heathen sold in the market as ordinary food, 
or ate them at feasts. The Jews, in their abhorrence of idolatry, 
regarded the use of such flesh as allied to the guilt of participating 
in idol-worship itself. See Rom. 14, 15 sq.; 1 Cor. 8, 10 sq. — 
kal ths mopvelas, and from fornication = licentiousness (Calv., 
Kuin., Olsh., Mey., De Wet.). Repeat dré. The other practices, 
it will be observed, relate to things which are not sinful per se, but 
derive their character from positive law, or from circumstances. 
The reason, probably, for associating this immorality with such 
practices is, that the heathen mind had become so corrupt as almost 
to have lost the idea of chastity as a virtue. Other senses of zop- 
veia, as idolatry, incest, marriage with unbelievers, concubinage, 
have been proposed. It is against any such unusual signification 
of the word, that it occurs again in the enactment (v. 29). The 
object of the decree. would require it to be framed with as much per- 
spicuity as possible, and would exclude the use of terms out of their 
ordinary acceptation. — kal rod muxrod, and from what has been 
strangled, i. e. from the flesh of animals put to death in that way. 
The Jews were not allowed to eat such flesh, because it contained 


CHAP. XY. 20— 23. ] NOTES. 211 


the blood; see Lev. 17, 13. 14; Deut. 12, 16. 23. — kat rod aipa- 
ros, and from blood, which the heathen drank often at their idola- 
trous feasts, and at other times and in various ways mingled with 
their food. 

V. 21. This verse assigns a reason for the proposed restric- 
tions, and that is, that the Jewish believers, being so accustomed to 
hear the things in question forbidden, were naturally sensitive in 
regard to them, and hence it was necessary, for the sake of peace 
and harmony, that the heathen converts should refrain from such 
practices. ‘This view of the connection is the most natural one. 
Calvin, Hemsen, Olshausen, De Wette, Meyer, and others, agree in 
it. Neander follows Chrysostom, who supposes the words to ex- 
plain why it was proposed to instruct the Gentiles only: the Jews 
had no occasion to be informed what the law required of them ; 
for Moses in every city, etc. ‘This interpretation not only turns 
the mind abruptly from one train of thought to another, but appears 
to concede more to the advocates of circumcision than the question 
at issue would allow. ‘To have justified the prohibitions on such 
ground would be recognizing the perpetuity of the Mosaic rites, 
so far as the Jews were concerned ; and we cannot suppose that 
the apostles at this time either entertained that view, or would give 
any direct countenance to it in the minds of others. 


V. 22-29. They appoint Messengers to the Churches, and send a 
Letter by them. 


V. 22. rére Moke, x. r. ., Then the apostles.... resolved, hav- 
ing selected men from themselves, to send them, etc. éxdeapevous 
“passes into the accusative, because the object of the governing 
verb, dmocrd\os, serves at the same time as the subject of the 
infinitive. K. 4 307. R. 2.— Judas is known only from this notice. 
His surname opposes the conjecture that he was Judas Thaddeus, 
the apostle. ‘There is no proof that he was a brother of Joseph 
Barsabas, the candidate for the apostleship (1, 23).— Silas became 
Paul’s:associate in his second missionary tour (v. 40). For Si\as 
in the Acts, we have always S.Aovaves in the Epistles. The former 
was his Jewish name probably, the latter his Gentile or foreign 
name; see on 13, 9. —ijyoupevous, eminent for reputation and 
authority (Luke 22, 26). 

V. 23. ypdyarres. The nominative of -a participle refers often 
to a preceding substantive in a different case, when that substantive 


212 NOTES. [CHAP. XV. 23+ 26. 


forms in fact the logical subject of the clause. K. § 313.1; W. 
§ 64. II. 2. The impersonal expression at the head of the sen- 
tence is equivalent to a transitive verb with the dative as nomina- 
tive. K. § 307. R. 5. —xard, throughout, since the churches were 
in different places. We see here how extensively the Judaizers 
had attempted to spread their views. ‘The scene at Antioch, v. 1, 
was only an example of what had occurred in many other places. 
— xaipew, sc. Aéyovor. It is remarkable, says Neander, that this 
word, as a form of epistolary salutation, occurs only here and in 
James 1, 1, with the exception of 23, 26, where it is a Roman who 
employs it. It would account for the coincidence if we suppose that 
the Apostle James drew up this document. His office as pastor of 
the church at Jerusalem would very naturally devolve that service 
on him. The occurrence of xaipew here and in the Epistle, Bleék 
urges as an indication that the two compositions are from the same 
hand. ' 

V.24. é jar, from us, which accords with v. 1. — érdpagéur, 
disquieted, perplexed; Gal. 1, 7.—)dyos may have, as Stier 
thinks, a disparaging force: with words merely, as opposed to the 
truth or sound doctrine. — dvacxevdgovres ras Wuyds tyar, subverting 
your souls, i. e. unsettling, removing them from the pure faith of 
the gospel. This clause describes the effect or tendency of the 
views which they were urged to adopt. —sepuréuveoOa, x. T. des 
that ye must be circumcised, and keep the law. For this power of 
the infinitive, see on v. 19. dei is not to be supplied. — ofs od 
SueoresAdueba, whom we did not command, i. e. instruct, authorize. 
This declaration may be aimed at a pretence on their part that 
they had been sent forth by the church at Jerusalem, or at least 
that they represented the sentiments of that church. 

V. 25. yevopévors suoOvpadey, having met together (Vulg., 
Neand.) ; but better, having become of one mind, unanimous (Bng., 
Str., Mey.). Kuinoel and De Wette are undecided. According to 
the latter view, the expression represents this perfect harmony as 
having been attained after some diversity of opinion; see y. 5.— 
exde£auevovs exemplifies again the construction in y. 22. — BaprdBa 
kai IlavAw. ‘This deviation from the usual order of these names since 
13, 13, as De Wette remarks after Bleek, testifies to the writer’s 
diplomatic accuracy. | 

V. 26. dvOpamos .... airdv, men who have given up, jeoparded, 
their lives; comp. 9, 24; 18,50; 14,5, 19. There was a special 








CHAP. XV. 26—29.] NOTES. 213 


reason, no doubt, for this commendation of Paul and Barnabas. It 
would serve to counteract any attempts which the Jewish party 
might make, or had made, to discredit their religious views and im- 
pair their reputation as teachers. 

V. 27. ody, therefore, i. e. in conformity with the conclusion in 
v. 25.— kal atrovs, x. 7. ., also themselves by word announcing 
(when they shall be present) the same things, i. e. that we now 
write to you (Neand., Mey., De Wet.) ; not the same things that 
Paul and Barnabas have taught. 8d Adyou indicates clearly that the 
oral communication was to confirm the contents of the letter or the 
written communication. ‘“ Judas and Silas,” says Stier, “ should 
certify that the letter had actually proceeded from a unanimous re- 
solve of the church at Jerusalem, and that Barnabas and Saul were 
thus honored and beloved there ; they should give fuller information 
respecting the decrees, and answer every inquiry that might be 
proposed, as living epistles, confirmed by the letter and confirming 
it in return; and thus by their word they should restore again the har- 
mony which those unsent members of their church had disturbed.” 

V. 28. éoke yap, For it seemed good, i. e. and especially how 
it seemed good. dp specifies the part of the letter which the writ- 
ers had more particularly in view in ra avtd. — kal jyiv does not 
distinguish the apostles from the Holy Spirit. The sense is the 
same as if it had been written mvevpare év nyiv (Olsh.). They were 
conscious of having adopted their conclusions under his guidance. 
De Wette thinks that the expression represents the Spirit and apos- 
tles as distinct from each other, as well as consentaneous. — réy ren- 
ders émdvayxes an adjective. B.§ 125.6. The things in question are 
said to be necessary, not (excepting the last of them) because they 
were wrong in themselves, but because the Gentile Christians were 
bound by the law of charity (see Rom. 14, 15) to avoid a course 
which, while it involved no question of conscience on their part, 
would offend and grieve their Jewish brethren, and lead inevitably 
to strife and alienation. 

V. 29. dréxecOa, to wit, that ye abstain. For this definitive use 
of the infinitive, see W. § 45. 3; C. § 623.— It is not perhaps acci- 
dental that ropveias has here a different position from that in v. 20; 
see also 21, 25. — ef dv .... €avrovs Neander compares with déom- 
ov éavrév type ard rod kdopov in James 1,27. The similarity is 
striking. —eéd mpagere, ye will do well, what is right and commend- 
able; see 10, 33; 3 John v. 6.— éppaode, like the Latin valete. 


214 _ NOTES. [cHAP. XV. 30-36. 


V. 30-35. Paul and Barnabas return to Antioch. 


V. 30. dmodvdévres, having been dismissed, i. e. with public to- 
kens of regard; v.33 ; 18, 3. — 76 mAnOos, the multitude ; see v. 12. 
They call at once an assembly of the believers to hear their re- 
port. ; 

V. 31. émt ry mapakdnoe, on account of the consolation fur- 
nished by the letter. They approve of what had been done; they 
rejoice at the prospect of so happy a termination of the dispute. 
Some render on account of the exhortation, which does not char- 
acterize naturally so authoritative a decision. 

V. 32. kal avrol rpopara dvres, and being also themselves proph- 
ets, 1. e. as well as Paul and Barnabas, and so competent to give 
the instruction needed. 

V. 33. er’ eipnyns, with peace; the parting salutation (16, 36; 
Mark 5, 34; Luke 7, 50). The brethren took leave of them 
with the best wishes for their safety and welfare. Judas and Silas 
both returned to Jerusalem, as their commission would require, but 
Silas must have soon rejoined Paul at Antioch, since we find him 
there in vy. 40. Luke has passed over that second journey. 

V. 34. Griesbach, Lachmann, Tischendorf, and others, strike 
out this verse. Most of the manuscripts omit it, or read it various- 
ly. Itisa gloss probably, supposed to be required by v. 40. If 
Silas remained at Antioch, the plural in v. 33 must then refer to 
individuals who accompanied the messengers from Jerusalem, whom 
the narrative does not mention. | 

V. 35.  dvérpiBov. ‘This was the interval between the return to 
Antioch (v. 80), and the departure on the next missionary tour (v. 
40). Some propose to insert here the scene described in Gal. 2, 
11 sq. ; but that such a reaction in favor of Judaism as appeared 
on that occasion should have taken place so soon after the decision 
at Jerusalem, is altogether improbable. See on 18, 23. —xai adds 
the second participle as explanatory of the first. 


V. 386-41. Paul and Barnabas resume their Work in different 
Fields of Labor. 


V. 36. pera dé rivas qyépas denotes apparently a short period ; 
comp. 9, 19; 16, 12. — 6 strengthens the exhortation; see 13, 2. 
— emickeWoueba .... Os €xovor May involve an attraction, viz. that 
of the subject of the last clause drawn into the first: let us go to 


CHAP. XV. 36—39.] NOTES. 215 


see.... how the brethren are (W. § 63. 4); or an ellipsis: Jet us 
visit the brethren, and see (as in the Eng. vers.) how they are. — 
év ais is plural because macay wédw is collective. W. § 21.2; K. 
§ 332. 5. — aés gyovor, in the mind of Paul, would have respect 
mainly to their spiritual welfare. 

V. 37. éBovdetcaro, determined. In this resolution he may have 
been swayed by his feelings more than his judgment, for he and 
Mark were cousins (aveyuoi) ; see Col. 4,10. éBovdcro, wished, is 
a false reading. 

V. 838. 7€&lov, deemed it just, fitting. Paul viewed the question 
on its ethical side. — riv drogrdvra dn’ airév, who departed from 
them (13, 13), in dereliction of his duty ; comp. Luke 8, 13. Yet 
Mark did not forfeit the apostle’s esteem by that act so as to be 
unable to regain it; he became subsequently Paul’s companion in 
travel (Col. 4, 10), and in 2 Tim. 4, 11 elicits from him the com- 
mendation that he was “ profitable to him for the ministry.” 

V. 39. eyévero wapoévopds, a severe contention arose. Barnabas 
insisted on his purpose, Paul on his view of the merits of the case ; 
and as neither would yield, they parted. — droywpiobjva refers, not 
to the rupture of their friendship, but to their proceeding in different 
directions, instead of laboring together as heretofore. It deserves 
to be remarked, that this variance did not estrange them from their 
work, or occasion any permanent diminution of their regard for 
each other. In 1 Cor. 9,6, which was written after this occur- 
rence, Paul alludes to Barnabas as a christian teacher, who pos- 
sessed and deserved the fullest confidence of the churches. The 
passage contains fairly that implication. Even the error of Barna- 
bas in yielding to the Jewish party (Gal. 2, 13) leads Paul to speak 
of him as one of the very last men (kal Bapvdfas, i. e. even he) 
whom any one would suppose capable of swerving from the line of 
duty. And who can doubt that Barnabas reciprocated these senti- 
ments towards the early, long-tried friend with whom he had acted 
in so many eventful scenes, and whom he saw still animated 
by the same affection towards himself, and the same devotion to 
the cause of their common Master? Luke does not mention the 
name of Barnabas again in the Acts. It is impossible to trace him 
further with any certainty. One tradition is that he went to Milan, 
and died as first bishop of the church there ; another is, that, after 
living some years at Rome and Athens, he suffered martyrdom in 
his native Cyprus. The letter still extant, which was known as that 


216 NOTES. [cHAP. Xv, 39— XVI. 1. 


of Barnabas even in the second century, cannot be defended as 
genuine.* That such a letter, however, was ascribed to him at 
that early period, shows how eminent a place he occupied among 
the Christians of his own and the succeeding age. 

V. 40. émrekduevos, having chosen for himself (comp. v. 22), 
not thereupon, viz. this disagreement. — mapadobels ...., ind Trav 
addehpov. Perhaps we may infer from this remark, that the brethren 
at Antioch took Paul’s view of the point at issue between him and 
Barnabas. — The departure on this second tour we may place in 
A. D. 51; for if Paul went to Jerusalem in the year 50 (see on 
15, 4), the remainder of that year, added (if any one chooses) to the 
early part of the ensuing year, would suffice probably for the so- 
journ at Antioch indicated by the expression in v. 36. It is impos- 
sible to be more definite than this. 

V. 41. Syria and Cilicia lay between Antioch and the eastern 
limit of the apostle’s first journey. We have had no account of 
the planting of any churches there, but they date undoubtedly from 
the period of Paul’s residence in that region, mentioned in Gal. 1, 
21. Compare on 9, 30.— émornpifar ras éxkAnoias, confirming the 
churches, not candidates for admission to them; see 14, 22. One 
of these churches may have been at Tarsus, which Paul would 
naturally revisit at this time. 





CHAPTER XVI. 


V.1-5. Paul and Silas revisit the Churches and deliver the 
Decrees. 


V. 1.  AépBnv cat Avorpay occur in this order (the reverse of that 
in 14, 6), because the journey is now from east to west. — éke?, 
there, viz. at Lystra. No sufficient reason exists in 20, 4 for re- 
ferring the adverb to Derbe ; see the Note there. The other name 
stands nearest, and occurs again in the next verse, where Luke 
surely would not pass over the testimony of those who had been 
acquainted with Timothy from early life. Wieseler combines the 
_ two opinions by supposing that he may have been a native of 





* See Neander’s Church History, Vol. I. p. 657. 


CHAP, XVI. 1—3.] NOTES, 217 


Lystra, but was living now at Derbe. — For the family and early 
education of Timothy, see 2 Tim. 1,5; 3,15. Paul terms him 
véxvov in 1 Cor. 4, 17, probably because he had been the instrument 
of his conversion ; comp. 1 Cor. 4,15; Gal. 4, 19. See the Note 
on 14, 20.— morris, believing ; see on 10,45, —°ENAnvos, a Greek, 
and perhaps still a heathen, as we should otherwise suppose the 
son would have been circumcised. 

V. 2. éuaprepeiro. See 6, 3; 10, 22. If Timothy was con- 
verted during Paul’s first visit to Lystra, he had now been a disci- 
ple three or four years. During that time he had labored, no 
doubt, for the cause of Christ in both cities. 

V. 3. ody airé e&edOciv, to go forth with him as a preacher of 
the word; see 2 Tim. 4, 5. —)AaBarv .... airév, having taken, he 
circumcised him (Mey., De Wet.), or caused him to be circumcised 
(Neand.). The Jews had no particular class of persons who per- 
formed: this act. ‘The Jewish custom, it is said, required merely 
that the administrator should not be a heathen. See Win. Realw. I. 
p- 157. — dia rovs “Iovdaiovs, x. r. A. It would have repelled the 
Jews from his ministry to have seen him associated with a man 
whom they knew to be uncircumcised. Paul took this course, 
therefore, in order to remove that obstacle to his usefulness. The 
history presents Paul here as acting on the principle stated in 1 Cor. 
9, 20: éyevduny trois “Iovdaiors ds “Iovdaios, iva “lovdaious Kepdjow, 
x. t. A. It was under circumstances totally different that he re- 
fused to circumcise Titus, as related in Gal. 2,3 sq. He was then 
in the midst of those who would have regarded the act as ratifying 
their doctrine that circumcision was necessary to salvation ; see on 
15, 1. In the present instance he knew (that admission is due to 
his character for intelligence as well as consistency) that his con- 
duct would not be misunderstood or perverted ; that the believers 
would view it as an accommodation merely to the prejudices of the 
Jews, and that the Jews themselves were in no danger of supposing 
him to countenance the idea that their keeping the law would en- 
title them to the favor of God. — Other passages extend our knowl- 
edge of this transaction. Timothy was not only circumcised, but 
set apart to the ministry “ with the laying on of the hands of the 
presbytery” and of the apostle, was endued with special gifts for 
the office (1 Tim, 4, 14; 2 Tim, 1, 6), and received at the time 
prophetic assurances of the success which awaited him in his new 
career (1 Tim. 1, 18). — decay yap, x. tA. The structure of the 
sentence is like that in 3, 10. 

28 


218 NOTES. [CHAP. XVI. 4-6. 


V.4. rds modes, the cities in this region where Paul had 
preached on his first mission ; comp. 15, 36. ‘To those mentioned 
in y. 1 we should add Iconium, and perhaps Antioch, though the 
latter was so remote from their general course that they may have 
transmitted the decrees thither. — mwapedidouy .... Sdypara, delivered 
to them the decrees to keep, i.e. that they should keep them, or 
which they should keep; comp. a mapéAaBov xpareivy, in Mark 7, 4. 
avrois refers to the believers in these cities ; not to the heathen con- 
verts merely (Mey.), since the decrees affected also the Jews. 

V. 5. ody, therefore, i.e. as the result of this visit, and of the 
adjustment of the controversy which had divided and enfeebled the 
churches. — 7@ dpibue, in the number of their members. 


V.6-10. They prosecute their Journey to Troas. 


V. 6. Spvyiav. See on 2,10. From Antioch they would direct 
their way to the northeast. — Tadarixjy xopav. Galatia was bound- 
ed on the north by Paphlagonia and Bithynia, on the east by the 
Pontus and Cappadocia (separated from them by the river Halys), 
on the south by Cappadocia and Phrygia, and on the west by 
Phrygia and Bithynia. Among the principal cities were Ancyra, 
made the metropolis by Augustus, and Pessinus. Kiepert draws the 
line of Paul’s course, on his map, so as to include these places, 
on the natural supposition that he would aim to secure first the 
prominent towns. See on 18,1. It is evident from the Epistle to 
the Galatians (see, e. g., 4,19) that the apostle Paul first preached 
the gospel in this country ; and since he found disciples here on his 
third missionary tour (see 18, 23), it must have been at this time 
that he laid the foundation of the Galatian churches (Gal..1, 2). 
Such is the opinion of the leading critics. See the Note on 14, 6. 
— kodvbévres, x. t. A. The course of movement may be sketched 
thus.. The travellers, having passed through the northeastern sec- 
tion of Phrygia into Galatia, proposed next to preach the word in 
proconsular Asia (see on 2, 9). With that view they turned their 
steps to the southwest, and, crossing the northern part of Phrygia, 
came down to the frontier of Mysia, the first province in Asia 
which they would reach in that direction. Being informed here 
that they were not to execute this design, they turned again to- 
wards the north and attempted to go into Bithynia, which was adja- 
cent to Mysia. Restrained from that purpose, they passed by My- 
sia, i. e. did not remain there to preach (comp. 20, 16), and pro- 


a, 4 
eee 








CHAP. XVI. 6—11.] NOTES. 219 


ceeded to Troas. — rd rvedpa "Inaod, i. e. the Spirit which he sends. 
There is no parallel passage. 

V. 8. wapedOdvres rv Mvoiay some explain in a different manner 
from that above suggested: having passed along Mysia, i.e. the 
border of Mysia Minor, which belonged to Bithynia, whereas My- 
sia Major belonged to proconsular Asia (De Wet.). — is Tpadda, 
unto Troas, the city of that name. It is correct that Luke repre- 
sents Troas here as distinct from Mysia. Under Nero, Troas and 
the vicinity formed a separate territory, having the rights of Ro- 
man freedom. (De Wet., Bottg.) 

V.9. «al Spaya, x. r.. Whether Paul saw this vision in a 
dream, or in a state of ecstasy (see 10, 10; 22, 17), the language 
does not decide. a rijs vuxros suggests one of the conditions of the 
first mode, but would not be inconsistent with the other. — dvjp: 
Makedov, a man revealed to him as a Macedonian ; comp. 9, 12.— 
divaBds, having crossed, i. e. the northern part of the A%gean. 

V. 10. é{nrjcapev. Paul had made known the vision to his as- 
sociates. Here for the first time the historian speaks of himself 
as one of the party. The introduction would be abrupt for the 
style of a modern work; but, on the other hand, to have had any 
formal account of the manner in which Luke became connected 
with the apostle would have been equalty at variance with the sim- 
plicity and reserve which distinguish the sacred writers. Nor does 
it relieve the matter to have recourse to the figment that Luke has 
adopted here the narrative of another writer: for we may just as 
well suppose him to speak thus abruptly in his own name, as to al- 
low another person to do it, without apprising us of the change.* 


V. 11-15. Paul and his Associates arrive in Europe, and preach 
at Philippi. 

V. 11. eddvdpouncaper, we ran by a straight course. In the 
nautical language of the ancients, as in that of the moderns, to run 
appears to have meant to sail before the wind, see 27,16. Luke 
observes almost a technical precision in the use of such terms. 
His account of the voyage to Rome abounds in examples of this. 
— Samothrace, now Samotraki or Samandrachi, was an island in 
the Augean, twenty-four miles from the opposite coast of Thrace. 
It was about half way between Troas and Neapolis. — Neapolis 





_ 


* See the marginal Note, p. 6. 


220 NOTES. [cHAP. XVI. 11— 13. 


was a Thracian city with a harbor on the Strymonic gulf. It 
was a place of little note. They touched here, but did not land, as 
appears from the use of the same verb to describe the remainder 
of the journey. 

V. 12. Philippi was about ten miles farther west, on a small 
stream called Gangas, or Gangitas. Its port, says Forbiger, was 
Datos, or Datum, which was an ancient name of Philippi itself. It 
was to the east of the Strymon, not on that river, as some have said. 
—iris.... kokdna, which is a chief city of the province of Macedonia, 
being a colony. sparn designates it as one of the first places there, 
and xodéwa explains the ground of the epithet. Augustus had sent 
a colony * thither, which had conferred upon it new importance. 
Some understand mpary geographically : first as they entered Mace- 
‘donia, which Winer calls the simplest explanation. ‘That Neapolis 
lay farther east, does not clash with this view ; for those who adopt 
it take Macedonia here in the Greek sense, which assigns Neapolis 
to Thrace. It is a stronger objection, that Luke would then mean 
Greek Macedonia here, but elsewhere the Roman province so 
named, i.e. Northern Greece in distinction from Achaia, or Southern 
Greece; see on 18, 5. Thessalonica was the residence of the 
pretor who governed this province. “It may be added,” says 
Akerman, “in confirmation of the words of Luke, that there are 
colonial coins of Philippi from the reign of Augustus to that of 
Caracalla.” It is frequently said, that this was the first place on 
the continent of Europe where the gospel was preached; but we 
have no certain knowledge of the origin of the church at Rome, 
and, very possibly, it may have been founded by some of the con- 
verts on the day of Pentecost. — jyépas twas denotes apparently 
the few days which they spent there before the arrival of the Sab- 
bath. 

V. 13. mapa rorapdv, by the side of a river, viz. the Gangas. 
The name may have been unknown to the writer.—od.... eivat, 
where (according to an ancient usage in that city) was wont to be a 
place of prayer (Kuin., Neand., Mey., De Wet.). The Jews 
preferred such a place on account of the lustrations which accom- 
panied their worship. Neander illustrates this usage from what 
Tertullian says ‘of them (De Jejun., c. 16): ‘ per omne litus quo- 





* See Mr. Long’s Article on Colonia in the Dictionary of Greek and 
Roman Antiquities. 


tS Sei a oe 








CHAP. XVI. 13-16. ] NOTES. 221 


cunque in aperto.... preces ad ccelum mittunt.” See also Jos. 
Antt. 14. 10, 23. The zpocevy7 here appears to have been, not an 
edifice, but a space or inclosure in the open air consecrated to this 
use. —rais cvvehOoicas ywvaki. The absence of a synagogue 
shows that the Jews here were not numerous. Those who met for 
prayer were chiefly women, and even some of these were converts 
to Judaism. 

V. 14. kai tis yor, x. tr. A. ~Liydia was a very common name 
among the Greeks and the Romans. It is not surprising, therefore, 
that it coincided with the name of her country. She is said to have 
been a seller of purple, sc. cloths, from Thyatira. ‘That city was 
on the confines of Lydia and Mysia ; and the Lydians, as ancient 
writers testify, were famous for precisely such fabrics. They pos- 
sessed that reputation even in Homer’s time; see Il. 4. 141. An 
inscription, “the dyers,” has been found among the ruins of 
Thyatira. — js .... xapdiav, whose heart the Lord opened, i. e., in 
conformity with other passages (Matt. 11, 25 sq.; Luke 24, 45; 
1 Cor. 3, 6. '7), enlightened, impressed by his Spirit, and so pre- 
pared to receive the truth. — mpocéyew, to attend, ecbatic, i. e. with 
such a result. 

V. 15. és 8 éBarrio6y. It is left indefinite whether she was 
baptized at once, or after an interval of some days. — 6 oikos avris. 
‘“« Here,” says De Wette, “as well as in v. 33; 18,8; 1 Cor. 1, 
16, some would find a proof for the apostolic baptism of children ; 
but there is nothing here which shows that any except adults were 
baptized.” * The oikos avrijs, as Meyer remarks, consisted probably 
of women who assisted her in her business. — ei xexpixare, if ye have 
judged, i. e. by the baptism which declared their confidence in her. 
ei is preferred to érei out of modesty. — moriy ré kupio, trusting to 
the Lord, i. e. having faith in him, a believer; comp. 10, 45; 
16, 1. R 


V. 16-18. Healing of a Demoniac Woman. 


V. 16.: eyévero 8¢, Now it came to pass on a subsequent day 
(Neand., De Wet.).— «is mpocevynv, unto the proseucha, which 
may omit the article as definite, because it was the only such place 
there. But some editors (Grsb., Lachm.) insert ryv. — maidioxny 
.... mdavos, a female slave (Gal. 4, 22) having the spirit of a 





* See Appendix, No, 3. 


222 NOTES. [CHAP. XVI. 16-18. 


pythoness, i. e. of a diviner who was supposed to have received her 
gift of prophecy from Apollo. Luke describes the woman accord- 
ing to her reputed character ; he does not express his own opinion 
of the case. ‘To suppose him to acknowledge Apollo as a real ex- 
istence would contradict 1 Cor. 8, 4.—apeiye, procured. Winer 
(§ 39. 6) says, that the active is more appropriate here than the 
middle (comp. 19, 24; Col. 4,1; Tit. 2,'7), because the gain was 
involuntary on her part.— rots xupiois atrijs, unto her masters. A 
slave among the ancients who possessed a lucrative talent was 
often the joint property of two or more owners. — pavrevopérn, by 
divining. 'That was the heathen term to denote the act. Luke 
would have said more naturally rpodnrvovea, had he been affirming 
his own belief in the reality of the pretension. —'The woman was 
in fact a demoniac (see v. 18) ; and as those subject to the power 
of evil spirits were often bereft of their reason, her divinations were 
probably the ravings of insanity. ‘The superstitious have always 
been prone to attach a mysterious meaning to the utterances of the 
insane. We are to take it for granted that the craft of the man- 
agers in this case would be exerted to assist the delusion. 

V.17. obdrot....cwrnpias. Some have supposed that she mere- 
ly repeated what she had heard them declare of themselves, or 
what she had heard reported of them by others. But the similarity 
of the entire account to that of the demoniacs mentioned in the 
Gospels requires us to refer this case to the same class of phenom- 
ena; see Matt. 8, 29; Mark 3, 11; Luke 4, 41; 8, 28, ete. Ac- 
cording to those passages, we must recognize the acknowledgment 
here as a supernatural testimony to the mission of Paul and his as- 
sociates, and to the truth of the gospel which they preached. 

V.18.  S:arovnbcis Hesychius defines by Aumnbecis, being grieved. 
With that sense it would refer to Paul’s commiseration of the 
woman’s unhappy condition. ‘Taken as in 4, 2, being indignant, it 
would show how he felt to witness such an exhibition of the malice 
of a wicked spirit ; comp. Luke 13, 16. The latter meaning di- 
rects the act of the participle to the same object as that of émorpé- 
yas and ceive. Itis better to preserve a unity in that respect. — 
T@ mvevpart, to the spirit, who is addressed here as distinct from the 
woman herself. The apostle deals with the case as it actually was, 
and his knowledge as an inspired teacher would enable him to 
judge correctly of its character. 


aie? 
a a 





' 


ee ae a 


Se eee eee a ee ee ee 














CHAP. XVI. 19-21. | NOTES. 223 


V. 19-24. Imprisonment of Paul and Silas. 


V. 19. dre 2&9Oev, x. r. X., that the hope of their gain had gone 
forth, i. e. with the exorcism (De Wet.). — émaAaBdperor. They 
seize upon Paul and Silas only because they had been most active, or 
possibly because ‘Timothy and Luke were recognized as Greeks. — 
eis riv dyopdy. In ancient cities the seats of the magistrates were 
erected commonly in the markets, or near to them. — émi rods apyov- 
ras, before the rulers, called in the next verse otparnyois. The chief 
magistrates in a Roman colony were the duumviri, or quatuorvirt, 
as the number was not always the same. They frequently took, 
however, the name of pretors, as one of greater honor, ard that 
in Greek was otparnyoi. It appears, therefore, that the magistrates 
at Philippi affected this latter title. It is worthy of notice that this is 
the only occasion in the Acts on which Luke applies the term to the 
rulers of a city.. Here in a Roman colony the government would 
be modelled naturally after the Roman form; and the manner in 
which the narrative reveals that circumstance marks its authenticity. 

V. 20. “Iovdaioe tmdpyorres, being Jews. They say this at the 
outset, in order to give more effect to the subsequent accusation. 
No people were regarded by the Romans with such contempt and 
hatred as the Jews. It is not probable that the Philippians at this 
time recognized any distinction between Judaism and Christianity ; 
they arraigned Paul and Silas as Jews, or as the leaders of some 
particular Jewish sect. 

V.21. %n, customs, religious practices. — otc ¢£eorw, k. tT. dr. 
The Roman laws suffered foreigners to worship in their own way, 
but did not allow Roman citizens to forsake their religion for that of 
other nations. This was the general policy. But beyond. that, Ju- 
daism had been specially interdicted. “It was a religio licita for 
the Jews,” says Neander ; “ but they: were by no means allowed to 
propagate their religion among the Roman pagans; the laws ex- 
pressly forbade the latter, under severe penalties, to receive circum- 
cision. It was the case, indeed, at this time, that the number of 
proselytes from the pagans was greatly multiplied. This the public 
authorities sometimes allowed to pass unnoticed ; but occasionally 
severe laws were passed anew to repress the evil.” Ch. Hist. 
Vol. I. p. 89. Still the charge in this instance, though formally . 
false, since they were not making proselytes to Judaism, was true 
substantially. It was impossible that the gospel should be preached 


224 NOTES. [CHAP. XVI. 21 —24. 


without coming into collision with the Roman laws. The gospel 
was designed to subvert one system of false religion as well as 
another. It proposed to save the souls of men without respect 
to the particular government or political institutions under which 
they lived. The apostles, in the promulgation of their message, 
acted under a higher authority than that of the Ceesars; and the 
opposition between Christianity and heathenism soon became ap- 
parent, and led to the persecutions which the Roman power inflicted 
on the church in the first centuries. 

V. 22. Kat cuveréotn, x. t.r., and the multitude rose up together 
against them. ‘This was not probably an actual assault, but a tu- 
multuous outburst of rage, a cry on all sides for the punishment of 
the offenders. The magistrates hasten to obey the voice of the 
mob. — mepippnéavres adray ra indria, having torn of their garments, 
not their own, but those of Paul and Silas. The rulers are said to 
do what they ordered to be done ; comp. mepiérevey in v. 3. It was 
customary to inflict the blows on the naked body. Livy (2. 5): 
‘* Missique lictores ad su mendum supplicium, nudatos virgis cz- 
dunt.” — éxéAevoy paBdifew, ordered to beat. Observe the official 
brevity of the expression. The imperfect stands occasionally in 
narration instead of the aorist, when the writer would represent the 
act as having taken place under his own eye. W. § 41.3. d; 
Mt. § 505. I. 1. In 2 Cor. 11, 25, Paul says that he was “ thrice 
beaten with rods.” This was one of the instances; the other two 
the history has not recorded. Such omissions prove that Luke’s 
narrative and the Epistles of Paul have not been drawn from each 
other ; that they are independent productions. ‘The Jewish law re- 
stricted the blows to “ forty save one’’; the Roman punishment 
was as severe as the inflicter chose to make it. 

V. 23.  oAAds mAnyds shows that no ordinary rigor would satisfy 
their exasperated feelings ; see also v. 33. 

V. 24. os.... einpos, who having received such a command. 
We have no reason to impute to the jailer any gratuitous inhuman- 
ity ; he obeyed his instructions. — eis ri ecarépav pvdaxyy, into the 
inner prison, the remotest part, whence escape would be most diffi- 
cult. Some confound this with the lower prison, which was under 
ground, and would be differently described (Wlch.). — kat rovs 
nédas, K. tT. A. and secured their feet into the block (= nervus). 
This was an instrument for torture as well as confinement. It was 
a heavy piece of wood with holes into which the feet were put, so 











CHAP. XVI. 24-28. ] NOTES. 225 


far apart as to distend the limbs in the most painful manner. Yet 
in this situation, with their bodies still bleeding from the effect of 
their recent chastisement, and looking forward to the morrow only 
in the expectation that it would renew their pains, they could still 
rejoice ; their prison at midnight resounds with the voice of prayer 
and praise. Neander cites here Tertullian’s fine remark: ‘ Nihil 
crus sentit in nervo, quum animus in ceelo est.” 


V. 25-34. An Earthquake shakes the Prison; Conversion of the 
Jailer and his Family. 


V. 25. mpowevydpevos, x. T. X., they prayed, and praised God. — 
énnxpoayro, listened to them while they sung. The imperfect de- 
scribes the act; the aorist would have related it merely. 

V.26. O@vpa réca. Some ascribe this opening of the doors to 
the shock of the earthquake ; others, more reasonably, to the power 
which caused the earthquake. — kat wdvrov, x. r. X., and the chains 
of all, i. e. the prisoners (see v. 28), were loosened. dyvé6r is first 
aorist passive from dvinu. B.§ 108; S.§ 81.1. That the other 
prisoners were released in this manner was, no doubt, miraculous ; 
it was adapted to augment the impression of the occurrence, to at- 
test more signally the truth of the gospel. ‘That they made no 
effort to escape may have been owing to the terror of the scene, or 
to a restraining influence which the author of the interposition ex- 
erted upon them. 

V. 27% Gueddev, x. r.X. ‘The jailer adopted this resolution be- 
cause he knew that his life was forfeited if the prisoners had 
escaped ; comp. I2, 19 ; 27, 42. — éxmedevyévar is perfect because 
the act, though past, was connected with the present : supposing the 
prisoners to have fled, and to be gone. W. § 41. 4. a. 

V. 28. For peydAn, see on 14, 10. > pndev mpdéys, k. tr. . For 
the mode and tense, see on 7, 60. How, it has been asked, could 
Paul have known the ‘jailer’s intention? The narrative allows us 
to reply, that either it was revealed to him, or may have been as- 
certained by natural means. We need not suppose that the prison 
was entirely dark (see on v. 29). The jailer may have stood at 
that moment where Paul could distinguish his motions; or, as Dod- 
dridge suggests, he may have inferred his purpose from some ex- 
clamation which he heard him utter. — dmavres ... . evOdde, we are 
all here. We do not know the structure of the prison. The part 
of it where the apostle was, and the position in which he sat, may 

29 





226 NOTES. [cHaP. XVI. 28— 30. 


have enabled him to see that no one of the prisoners had passed 
through the open doors; or he may have been divinely instructed 
to give this assurance. 

V. 29.  airjoas ara, having called for lights, which could be 
carried in the hand. ‘The noun is neuter and in the plural, not 
singular (Eng. vers.). The ordinary night-lamps, if such were 
used, may have been fastened, or have furnished only a faint glim- 
mer. dra may be a generic plural, but refers more probably to 
the jailer’s summoning those in his service to procure lights, to 
enable him to ascertain the condition of the prison. The sequel 
shows that the whole family were aroused. — mpocemece, fell down, 
cast himself at their feet in token of reverence; see Mark 3, 11; 
Luke 8, 28. He knew that the miracle was on their account. 

V. 30. a, out, i. e. of the inner prison into another room, not 
into his own house; see v. 84.— i pe.... Wa cob; What must 
I do in order that I may be saved. ‘Their answer in the next verse 
shows with what meaning the jailer proposed this question. It can- 
not refer to any fear of punishment from the magistrates ; for he 
had now ascertained that the prisoners were all safe, and that he ~ 
was in no danger from that source. Besides, had he felt exposed 
to any such danger, he knew that Paul and Silas had no power to 
protect him; it would have been useless to come to them for as- 
sistance. ‘The question in the other sense appears abrupt, it is true ; 
but we are to remember that Luke has recorded only parts of the 
transaction. The unwritten history would perhaps justify some 
such view of the circumstances as this. The jailer is suddenly 
aroused from sleep by the noise of the earthquake ; he sees the 
doors of the prison open; the thought instantly seizes him, — the 
prisoners have fled. He knows the rigor of the Roman law, and is 
on the point of anticipating his doom by self-murder. But the 
friendly voice of Paul recalls his presence of mind. His thoughts 
take at once a new direction. He is aware that these men claim 
to be the servants of God; that they profess to teach the way of 
salvation. It would be nothing strange if, during the several days 
or weeks that Paul and Silas had been at Philippi, he had heard the 
gospel from their own lips, had been one among those at the 
river-side, or in the market, whom they had warned of their dan- 
ger, and urged to repent and lay hold of the mercy offered to them 
in the name of Christ. And now suddenly an event had taken 
place, which convinces him in a moment that the things which he 





. 
5 


ere a ae 


[ee FF eee 
5 wet 


CHAP. XVI. 30—35.] NOTES. 227 


has heard are realities ; it was the last argument, perhaps, which he 
needed to give certainty to a mind already inquiring, hesitating. 
He comes trembling, therefore, before Paul and Silas, and asks 
them to tell him— again, more fully—what he must do to be 
saved. 

V. 31. xat coOjon, x. r. A. They represent the salvation as 
ample ; it was free not only to him, but to all the members of his 
family who would accept the proffered mercy. The apostle in- 
cludes them, because, as we see from the next verse, they were 
present and listened with the jailer to the preaching of the gospel. 

V. 32. kat €hdAnoay, x. t. d., and they spake to him the word of 
the Lord, and to all who were in his house. This refers to the 
more particular instruction respecting the way of salvation, which 
they proceeded to give after the general direction in the preceding 
verse. — rois év rij olxia avrod cannot embrace infants, because they 
are incapable of receiving such instruction. 

V. 33. doveev ard tév mAnydy stands concisely for washed and 
cleansed them from their stripes. W.§51.b. This verb, says 
Dr. Robinson, signifies to wash the entire body, not merely a part 
of it, like virrw.— éBarric6y. ‘The rite may have been performed, 
says Meyer, in the same fountain or pond in which the jailer had 
washed them. De Wette repeats the same remark. Others think, 
as Grotius, Rosenmiiller, Kuinoel, that there may have been a coAvp- 
BnOpa, or swimming-bath, within the walls of the prison. Such a 
bath was a very common appurtenance of houses and public edi- 
fices among the Greeks and Romans. — oi atrod rayres are evident- 
ly the maou rois év rf oixig avrod to whom they had just preached the 
word, as stated in v. 32. 

V. 34. dvayayav, x. tr. X., having brought them up into his house, 
which appears to have been over the prison. — jyaAXcdoaro ravorki, 
he rejoiced with all his family, i.e. he and all his family rejoiced. 
— memotevkds TH OeG states the object or occasion of their joy 
(comp. 1 Cor. 14, 18): having believed in God. This act, like that 


_ of the verb, is predicated of the jailer’s family as well as of himself. 


V. 35-40. They are set at Liberty, and depart from Philippi. 


V. 35. rods paPdodxous, the rod-bearers (lictores), who waited 
upon Roman magistrates and executed their orders. In the colo- 
nies they carried staves, not fasces as at Rome. It deserves notice 
that Luke introduces this term just here. It would have been out 


228 NOTES. _ [eoHaP. XVI. 35-37. 


of place had he applied it to the attendants of Greek. or Jewish 
magistrates. — drdédvoov, release them. The rulers did not com- 
mand them to leave the city, but expected them, doubtless, to use 
their liberty for that purpose. It is uncertain how we are to ac- 
count for this sudden change of disposition towards Paul and Silas. 
The magistrates may have reflected in the interval on the injustice 
of their conduct, and have relented; or, more probably, being 
heathen and superstitious, they had been alarmed by the earth- 
quake, and hastened to liberate the strangers, supposing that the 
gods were angry. 

V. 36. dri dmeorddkaow, that they have sent,sc. a message, or 
messengers. — év eipnyyn, in peace, unmolested; see on 15, 33. 
The jailer anticipates their ready acceptance of the offer. 

V. 37. mpos avrods, unto them, the lictors. ‘The jailer may have 
conveyed to them Paul’s message, or they too may have gone into 
the prison. — deipavres, x, tr. A. Almost every word in this reply 
contains a distinct allegation. It would be difficult to find or frame 
a sentence superior to it in point of energetic brevity. Both the 
lec Valeria and the lew Porcia made it a crime to inflict blows or 
any species of torture on a Roman citizen. ‘ Facinus est vinciri 
civem Romanum, scelus verberari, prope parricidium necari.”’ 
(Cic. in Verr. 5. 66).— dypooia. It would have been a crime to 
have struck them a single blow, even in secret; they had been 
cruelly scourged in open day, and before hundreds of witnesses. 
— dkxarakpirovs. ‘The Roman laws held it to be one of the most 
sacred rights of the citizen that he should be tried in due form be- 
fore he was condemned. ‘Causa cognita multi possunt absolvi ; 
incognita quidem condemnari nemo potest.”’ (Cic. in Verr. 1. 9). 
Even slaves had an admitted legal, as well as natural, right to be 
heard in their defence before they were punished. —‘Poyaiovs. In 
22, 28, Paul says that he was “ free born.”’ In regard to the prob- 
able origin of his Roman citizenship, see the Note on 22, 25. It 
appears that Silas possessed the same rights, but it is not known 
how he obtained them. At first view it may appear surprising that 
Paul did not avow himself a Roman at the outset, and thus prevent 
the indignity to which he had been subjected. ‘ But the infliction 
of it,” says Biscoe, ‘¢ was so hasty, that he had not time to say any 
thing that might make for his defence ; and the noise and confusion 
were so great, that, had he cried out with ever so loud a voice that 
he was a Roman, he might reasonably believe that he should not be 


CHAP. XVI. 37—39.] NOTES. 229 


regarded. Seeing also the fury of the multitude (v. 22), it is not 
improbable he might think it most advisable to submit to the sen- 
tence pronounced, however unjust, in order to quiet the people, and 
prevent a greater evil; for he was in danger of being forced out of 
the hands of the magistrates, and torn in pieces. But whatever were 
the true reasons which induced the apostle to be silent, the overruling 
hand of Providence was herein plainly visible ; for the conversion of 
the jailer and his Household was occasioned by the execution of this 
hasty and unjust sentence.’ 

kai viv AdOpa, k. t. ., and do they now send us forth aii 2 
Our English version pends the verb too strongly (comp. 9, 40), 
and thus draws away the emphasis from Adépa, to which it be- 
longs. — od ydp, no certainly; they do not dismiss us in that 
manner. ydp, in such a case, is said to strengthen the denial. 
More strictly (resolving ydp into its parts), yé has that effect, 
while dpa shows the dependence of the answer on what pre- 
cedes: not according to that, i.e. after such treatment. Klotz 
(ad Devar. IL p. 242), Winer (§ 57. 4), and others, adopt this 
analysis. — adroi, they themselves, instead of sending their servants 
to us. — In assertifig so strongly their personal rights, they may 
have been partly influenced by a natural sense of justice, and part- 
ly by a regard to the necessity of such a vindication of their inno- 
cence to the cause of Christ at Philippi. It was important that no 
stain should rest upon their reputation. It was notorious that they 
had been scourged and imprisoned as criminals ; if after their de- 
parture any one had suspected, or could have insinuated, that pos- 
sibly they had suffered not without cause, it would have created a 
prejudice against the truth. It was in their power to save the gospel 
from that reproach, and they used the opportunity. It may be proper 
at times to allow the wicked or misguided to trample upon our in- 
dividual rights and interests if they choose; but those who are 
** set for the defence of the gospel” owe their good name and 
their influence to Christ and the church, and have a right to invoke 
the protection of the laws against any invasion of their means of 
public usefulness. 

V. 38. épo878ncav. ‘They had cause for apprehension; comp. 
22, 29. A magistrate who punished a Roman citizen wrongfully 
might be indicted for treason ; he was liable to suffer death, and the 
confiscation of all his property (Grot.). 

V. 39. nparev, entreated, begged (3,3). This was not an un- 


230 NOTES. - [CHAP. XVI. 39-—XVII. 1. 


exampled humiliation for a Roman officer. Lucian mentions a 
case of false imprisonment in which the governor of a province not 
only acknowledged his error, but paid a large sum of money to 
those whom he had injured, to induce them to be silent. 

V. 40. rots ddedpois, the brethren, who had been converted 
there, and who formed the beginning of the church, afterwards ad- 
dressed in the Epistle to the Philippians. This church was found- 
ed, therefore, about A. D. 52. We have evidence in that Epistle, 
that, of all the churches planted by Paul, no one possessed so en- 
tirely his confidence, or exhibited the power of the gospel in greater 
purity. — éjAdov. ‘The narrator, it will be seen, proceeds now in 
the third person, and maintains that style as far as 20,5. Some 
have inferred from this, that Luke remained at Philippi until Paul’s 
last visit to Macedonia.* We find Timothy with the apostle at 
Bercea (17, 14), but whether he accompanied him at this time, or 
rejoined him afterwards, cannot be decided. 





CHAPTER XVII. 


V.1-4. They proceed to Thessalonica and preach there. 


V. 1. The place which invited their labors next was Thessa- 
lonica, somewhat less than a hundred miles southwest of Philippi. 
They travelled thither on the great military road which led from 
Byzantium to Dyrrachium or Aulona, opposite to Brundusium in 
Italy. ‘They could accomplish the journey in three or four days 
( Wiesl.). — On leaving Philippi, they came first to Amphipolis, 
which was southwest, distant about thirty miles. This place was 
near the mouth of the Strymon, which flowed around it, and gave 
to it its name, — Apollonia, their next station, was about the same 
distance southwest from Amphipolis. They remained a night, per- 
haps, at each of these towns. — Thessalonica was a rich, commer- 
cial city, near the mouth of the Echedorus, on the Thermaic Gulf, 
about twenty-eight miles nearly west of Apollonia. It is now called 
Saloniki, having a population of seventy thousand, of whom thirty 
thousand are Jews.t — 4 ovvaywyn, the synagogue; definite because 





* See Introduction, p. 5. 
+ An ancient traveller’s note-book, in passing through this region, would 


rs - i 3 
CS Re ge eye ee a oe eee wed 


CHAP. XVII. 1—4.] NOTES. 231 


the Jews in that — may have had but one such ‘place of wor- 
ship. W.$ 17.1 

V.2.  ciw6ds is + cone like a noun, but governs the dative 
as a verb; comp. Luke 4, 16. The genitive would have been the 
ordinary case. W.§ 31. 7. N. 2. In conformity with his custom, 
Paul preaches first to the Jews. —drd trav ypapay, from the Scrip- 
tures ; he drew the contents of his discourse from that source. 

V. 3. diavotywr, sc. ras ypapds, opening, unfolding their sense ; 
comp. Luke 24, 32. — rapariOéuevos, propounding, maintaining. — 
re tov Xprorov, K. tT. A., that the Messiah must suffer, in order to ful- 
fil the Scriptures; comp. 3, 18; Matt. 26, 54.56; Mark 14, 49. 
— kal drt obros, x. r. X., and that this one (viz. he who was to die 
and rise again) is the Messiah Jesus (i. e. the Jesus called Mes- 
siah) whom I announce unto you. The scope of the argument’is 
this: Jesus had fulfilled the necessary conditions of prophecy in 
regard to the Messiahship, and was, therefore, the Messiah ; comp. 
2, 24 sq.; 18, 27 sq. 

V.4. e& airay, i.e. of the Jews. — mpocekAnpdénoay some ren- 
der as middle: attached themselves, adhered to Paul and Silas. 
So Olshausen, Wahl, Robinson. This is the easier sense, and re- 
ceives support from v. 34; 14,4. Others render as passive : were 
allotted, granted to them, as it were by divine favor. So Winer 
(§ 40. 2), Harless,* De Wette, Meyer. This: may be the surer 
philological sense. — rév re oeBopévov, x. tr. X. The women were 
evidently ‘‘ devout,” or proselytes (comp. 13, 50), as well as the 
men ; so that those referred to in this verse were won to Christiani- 
ty from the Jewish faith, not from a state of heathenism. But in 
1 Thess. 1, 9, Paul speaks as if many of the Thessalonian Chris- 
tians had been idolaters: émearpéypare mpds tov bedv dmb ray ciddédav. 
Hence it is possible, as Paley conjectures, that this verse describes 
the result of Paul’s labors during the three weeks that he preached 
in the synagogue (v. 2); and that an interval which Luke passes 
over preceded the events related in v. 5-10. During this interval 





contain just such a record as Luke has inserted in this verse, We turn to 
the Itinerarium Antonini Augusti (p. 157, ed. Parthey et Pinder, 1848), 
and find the places mentioned here enumerated in precisely the same order 
there. The distances given in the Itinerary are as follows: from Philippi 
to Ampbipolis, thirty-two Roman miles; from Amphipolis to Apollonia, 
also thirty-two miles ; from Apollonia to Thessalonica, thirty-six miles, 

* Commentar Uber den Brief Pauli an die Ephesier, p. 55 sq. 


232 NOTES. [cHaP xvii. 4-8. 


the apostle, having been excluded from the synagogue by the 
bigotry of the Jews, may have preached directly to the heathen. 
Another opinion is, that he preached to them during the week-time, 
while on the Sabbath he labored for the Jews at their place of 
public worship (Neand.). 


V.5-9. The Jews accuse Paul and Silas before the Magistrates. 


V. 5. rév dyopaiay, market-loungers (subrostrani, subbasilicant). 
In the East that class of people collect about the city gates. Luke 
evinces here his usual knowledge of the habits of different nations. 
The Jews had but little power out of Judea, and hence they were 
obliged, as on other occasions, to secure the aid of the native in- 
habitants. — "Iacovos, who was their host (v. '7), and also a relative 
of Paul, if he was the Jason mentioned in Rom. 16,21. In the 
latter case, he must have been at Corinth when Paul wrote the 
Epistle to the Romans. — é¢jrowy .... dijpov, sought to bring them 
unto the people, and at the same time éml rods modurdpyas (v. 6), i. e. 
into the forum, where the magistrates were accustomed to try 
causes in the presence of the people. 

V.6. pi) edpdrres, x. r.0., but not finding them, they dragged 
Jason and certain brethren before the city rulers. The idea is, not 
that they changed their plan on failing to apprehend Paul and Silas, 
but that they seized others and carried their design into effect with 
reference to them. The ddecddods appear to have been with Jason 
at the time of the assault ; probably they were some of the Thessa- 
lonians who had believed. dro: are Paul and Silas, since they are 
those whom Jason entertained. — kat év6dSe, also here, as formerly 
in other places. : 

V.7. otros mavres, all these, viz. Paul, Silas, and their followers. 
The pronoun includes more than its grammatical antecedent. — 
tév Soyparov Kaicapos, i. e. the Roman laws against rebellion or trea- 
son. ‘They are said to be the decrees of the emperor, i. e. of each 
successive emperor, because they guarded his rights, and had the 
support of his authority. —Baowdéa érepov, another king, sovereign ; 
comp. John 19, 15; 1 Pet. 2,13. The Greeks applied this term to 
the emperor, though the Romans never styled him rez. 

V. 8. érdpa€av, x. 7.4. The statement alarmed them, because 
the existence of such a party in their midst would compromise their 
character for loyalty, and expose them to the vengeance of their 
Roman masters. 


CHAP. XVII. 9-13.] NOTES. 233 


V.9. aBévres 1d ixavdv, having taken bail, or security ; said to 
be a law phrase adopted in Greek for satis accipere. What they 
engaged would naturally be, that, as far as it depended on them, the 
peace should not be violated, and that the alleged authors of the 
disturbance should leave the city (Neand.). But some restrict the 
stipulation to the first point (Mey.), others restrict it to the last 
(Kuin.). — rév Aouray, the others who had been brought before the 
tribunal with Jason (see v. 6). 


V. 10-13. Paul and Silas proceed to Berea. 


V. 10. «d6éos. “On the evening of the same day, Paul and 
Silas left the city, after a residence of three or four weeks (see 
v. 2). As Paul could not remain there as long as the necessities 
of the newly formed church required, his anxiety was awakened on 
its behalf, since he foresaw that it would have to endure much per- 
secution from the Gentiles at the instigation of the Jews. He had 
formed, therefore, the intention of returning thither as soon as the 
first storm of the popular fury had subsided (1 Thess. 2,18). Pos- 
sibly he left Timothy there, who had not been an object of perse- 
cution, unless he met him first at Bercea, after leaving Philippi.” 
(Neand.) Wieseler extends the residence at Thessalonica to six or 
eight weeks. It may be added, that while Paul was here he re- 
ceived supplies twice from the church at Philippi; see Phil. 4, 15. 
16. From this source, and from his own personal labor, he derived 
his support, without being dependent at all on the Thessalonians ; 
see 1 Thess. 2, 9; 2 Thess. 3, 8. — 81a rs vuerds. ‘This secrecy 
indicates that they were still in danger from the enmity of the 
Jews ; comp. 20, 3. — eis Bépoav. Berea, now Verria, was about 
forty-five miles southwest of Thessalonica, on the Astrzeus, a small 
tributary of the Haliacmon. See Forbg. Handb. III. p. 1061. — 

V. 11.  edyevéorepa, more noble in their disposition. — For maons, 
see on 4, 29.— 16 ka? jpepav, viz. from day today. ro fixes at- 
tention more strongly upon the repetition or constancy of the act. 
W.§ 20. 3.— ei gyor radra otras, if these things taught by Paul 
were so, as he affirmed, i. e. when examined by the Scriptures. 

V. 12. ‘EX nvidev agrees with both yuvadéy and dvdpdv: Gre- 
cian women and Grecian men; see the Note on 2,42. — For evoxn- 
povev, see 18, 50. — dAtyor may be masculine because dydpéy is the 
nearer word, or out of regard to the leading gender. 

V. 13. «ai, also, associates Bercea with Thessalonica. — kdxe? 

30 


234 NOTES. [cHaP. XVII. 13, 14. 


belongs to the participle, not to the verb. They excited the popu- 
lace there also, as they had done at home.* 


V. 14,15. Paul advances to Athens. 


V. 14. ds émi rv Oddaccar, as upon the sea,i. e. as if he was to 
travel in that way. 4s joined thus with émi, eis, or mpés denotes de- 
sign, but leaves it uncertain whether the design be executed, or pro- 
fessed merely. See W.§ 67.6; K.§ 290,R.2; B.§ 149. Some 
suppose the movement here to have been a feint; that Paul’s con- 
ductors, having set out ostensibly for the sea, in order to elude pur- 
suit, changed their course, and proceeded to Athens by land (Olsh., 
Neand.). But in that event, they would have passed through vari- 
ous important places on the way, and Luke might be expected to 
have named some of them, after the example inv. 1. The jour- 
ney by land would have been two hundred and fifty-one Roman 
miles (Itiner. Anton.). With a fair wind Paul and his party could 
have sailed from Bercea or the mouth of the Haliacmon to Athens 
in about three days (Wiesl.) ; and the probability is, that they took 
this more expeditious course (Win., De Wet., Wiesl., Mey.).— 
Tipdbeos has not been mentioned by name since 16, 1, 





* « Of the imperial coins struck in this city, we have only those of 
Trajan and Antoninus Pius; and they uniformly bear the same device on 
the reverse, viz. the name of the people within a garland. It is worthy of 
a passing remark, that these coins are among the few examples of ancient 
money which bear no pagan figure or symbol. If we consider the religious 
feeling which generally influenced the artists of antiquity, we are naturally 
led to inquire what could have induced the rejection by the people of 
Bercea of devices of a pagan character, which abounded at this period on 
the money of other cities. Although we have the testimony of Pliny as to 
the spread of Christianity in the days of Trajan, it would perhaps be ven- 
turing too far to suggest that the absence of pagan devices on the coins of 
Berea is attributable to that fact. The narrative of Luke, which represents 
the Jews as numerous at Berea, suggests another explanation; namely, 
that they may have been more strict than their brethren in other cities ; 
and although not allowed to hold magisterial offices, they were probably 
versed in the mechanic arts and employed in the mint; in which case 
they would naturally shun the representation of any living thing on the re- 
verse, though the law compelled them to tolerate the head of Cesar. If 
this conjecture be deemed inadmissible, it may be suggested, that, even sup- 
posing the Jews resident in this city to have no authority in the mint, the 
magistrates may have had a desire to offer nothing offensive to the Hebrew 
population on their local currency,’ Akerman’s Numismatic Illustrations, 
p. 45. 


CHAP. XVII. 15, 16.] NOTES. 235 


V. 15. ds raxvora, as soon as possible (K. § 239, R. 2. d), i. e. 
consistently with the service which they had remained to perform. 
Whether they rejoined the apostle at Athens, or not, is uncertain ; 
see on the following verse. 


V. 16-21. Effect of the Idolatry at Athens on the Mind of Paul. 


V. 16. éxdexouevov atrovs, while he was waiting for them, viz. 
Silas and Timothy. The most natural inference from 1 Thess. 3, 
1, is that Timothy, atleast, soon arrived, in accordance with Paul’s 
expectation, but was immediately sent away by the apostle to Thes- 
salonica. As Silas is not mentioned in that passage, it has been 
supposed that he may have failed for some reason to come at this 
time, or if he came, that, like Timothy, he may have left again at 
once, but for a different destination ; which last circumstance would 
account for the omission of his name in that passage of the Epistle. 
Our next notice of them occurs in 18, 5, where they are repre- 
sented as coming down from Macedonia to Corinth; and we may 
suppose either that they went to that city directly from Bercea, 
without having followed Paul to Athens, or that they returned from 

Athens to Macedonia, and proceeded from there to Corinth. The 
latter view assumes that Luke has passed over the intermediate 
journey in silence. Such omissions are entirely consistent with a 
fragmentary history like that of the Acts. Still other combinations 
are possible. — wapwEivero .... év airo, his spirit was aroused in 
him, comp. 15, 39; 1 Cor. 18,5. This verb represents the apos- 
tle as deeply moved with a feeling allied to that of indignation, at 
beholding such a profanation of the worship due to God as forced 
itself upon his view on every side. — kareidSwdov means, not given to 
idolatry, but full of idols. ‘The word is otherwise unknown to the 
extant Greek, but is formed after a common analogy, e. g. xardure- 
os, xatddevSpos, xardpoBos, etc. The epithet applies to the city, not 
directly to the inhabitants. A person could hardly take his position 
at any point in ancient Athens, where the eye did not range over 
temples, altars, and statues of the gods almost without number. 
Petronius says satirically, that it was easier to find a god at Athens 
than a man. Another ancient writer says that some of the streets 
there were so crowded with those who sold idols, that it was almost 
impossible for one to make his way through them. Pausanias de- 
clares that Athens had more images than all the rest of Greece put 
together. Wetstein quotes Xenophon, Isocrates, Cicero, Livy, Stra- 


236 NOTES. [CHAP, XVII. 16-18. 


bo, Lucian, and others, as bearing the same testimony. Luke, there- 
fore, has not applied this epithet at random. The Greek language 
offered to him a hundred other terms which would have stated what 
was true in relation to a heathen city ; but we see that he has chosen 
among them all the very one which describes the precise external 
aspect of Athens that would be the first to strike the eye of a 
stranger like Paul. This mark of accuracy in the writer, those ob- 
literate, or very nearly obliterate, who make the expression refer 
to the devotion of the Athenians to idolatry.* 

V. 17. ody, therefore, i. e. being thus excited (Mey. \ The 
apostle’s ordinary course was to address himself exclusively at first 
to his own countrymen and the heathen proselytes to Judaism ; but 
that his present state of mind would not permit him todo. He is 
moved by the spectacle around him to commence preaching simul- 
taneously to Jews and Greeks. Some adopt a looser connection : 
therefore, i. e. being at Athens (De Wet.). Some restrict ody to the 
second clause : his zeal impelled him to preach in the market. It is 
arbitrary to divide the sentence in that manner. — év rH dyopa, in the 
market, i. e. of the city. It is generally admitted that the Athenians 
had but one market, properly so called, although Leake has shown it 
to be probable, that, “‘ during the many centuries of Athenian pros- 
perity, the boundaries of the Agora, or at least of its frequented part, 
underwent considerable variation.” + Some of the notices in ancient 
writers in regard to its course and extent are vague, and have been 
differently understood ; but it is certain that the site of the market 
was never so changed as to exclude the famous orod roiidn, which, 
according to Forchammer’s Plan, stood off against the Acropolis on 
the west. In this porch, as is well known, the philosophers, rhetori- 
cians, and others were accustomed to meet for conversation and 
discussion ; and hence it lay entirely in the course of things that 
some of these men should fall, as Luke states, in the way of the 
apostle. : 

V. 18. rév’Emxovpeiov. The frivolous spirit of this sect may 
be traced, as some think, in the first of the questions addressed to 
the apostle. ‘The Epicureans were the “ minute philosophers,” the 





* Hermann (ad Vig. p. 638, ed. 1824) turns aside to correct this error : 
“KareidwAos modus, Actor. Apost. 17, 16, non est, uti qaidam opinantur, 
simulacris dedita urbs, sed simulacris referta.” 

t Athens and Demi, p. 217. 


_ CHAP. XVII. 18.] NOTES. 237 


Greek Sadducees of the age; they admitted the existence of gods, 
but regarded them as indolent beings, who paid no attention to the 
actions or affairs of men; they had no faith in a providence, or in 
accountability, or in any retribution to come. Their great practical 
dogma was, that a wise man will make the most of all the means of 
enjoyment within his reach. Epicurus, the founder of the sect, had 
taught a higher idea of happiness; but his followers in the Roman 
age, and earlier still, had reduced it to the grossest sensualism. — 
tav Stwikav. The Stoics were distinguished in some respects for a 
more reflecting turn of mind; they extolled virtue, insisted on sub- 
jecting the passions to reason, and urged the importance of becom- 
ing independent of the ordinary sources of enjoyment and suffer- 
ing. Some of the most admired characters of antiquity belonged to 
this school. But the Stoics were essentially fatalists in their re- 
ligious views ; they were self-complacent, boasted of their indiffer- 
ence to the world, and affected a style of morals so impracticable 
as to render them almost necessarily insincere or hypocritical. In 
Epicureanism it was man’s sensual nature which arrayed itself 
against the claims of the gospel; in Stoicism, it was his self-right- 
eousness and pride of intellect ; and it is difficult to say which of the 
two systems rendered its votaries the more indisposed to embrace 
the truth. It might have seemed to the credit of Christianity, had 
it been represented as gaining at least a few proselytes, in this cen- 
tre of Grecian refinement, from the ranks of its scholars and phi- 
losophers ; but Luke has no such triumphs to record. He relates 
the case as it was; the apostle was ridiculed, his message was 
treated with contempt. — ovvéBaddov airg, not probably met with 
him, as in 20, 14 (Bng.), but conversed or disputed with him 
(Mey., De Wet.); comp. 4,15. The following cai @\cyov agrees 
with either sense. — ri av Oédot,x. tr. A., what would this babbler 
say, does he mean to say? dy sharpens the taunt: if he has any 
meaning (Mey.). See W..§ 43. 1; -C. § 604. omeppordyos de- 
notes strictly a seed-gatherer, and then, as used here, one who picks 
up and retails scraps of knowledge without sense or aim, an idle 
prater. — &évev Sapovierv, foreign gods, hitherto unknown to us. 
As the expression is cited from the mouth of the Greeks, we are to 
attach to it their sense of Sayuomoy, which was different from that of 
the Jews. The noun may be plural, because it refers to Jesus as 
an example of the class or category (see W. § 27. 2;-S. § 95. 2); 
or it may be founded on what Paul had said to them concern- 


238 NOTES. [CHAP. XVII. 18, 19. | 


ing God, especially his agency in raising up Christ from the dead 
(comp. v. 31). The latter is the best view (De Wet.). Both 
Jesus and the God of whom they now heard were new to them. 
Many of the older critics, and some of the more recent, explain 
the plural as embracing dvdcraow, supposing the Athenians to have 
understood Paul to speak of some goddess when he preached to 
them the resurrection. But one can hardly conceive that the apos- 
tle would have expressed himself so obscurely on this subject as 
to have given them any occasion for falling into so gross a mis- 
take; and we are not authorized by any intimation in the narra- 
tive to impute to them any thing like a wilful perversion of his 
language. 


~V.19-21. Paul repairs to Mars’ Hill to explain his Doctrine. 


V. 19. émidaBdpevoi re adrod, and taking hold upon him, not with 
violence, which would be at varianee with the general spirit of the 
transaction, but rather by the hand, for the purpose of leading him 
onward ; comp. 9, 27; Mark 8, 23; Luke 9, 47.— émi rév ’Apecoy 
nayov, upon Mars’ Hill, i. e. the top of it; comp. 10,9; Matt. 4, 
5; 24,16, etc. W.§ 53.1. The Areiopagus, whither Paul was 
now brought, was a rocky eminence a little to the west of the 
Acropolis. See Leake’s Athens, p. 165. The objeet of the move- 
ment was to place the apostle in a situation where he could be 
heard by the multitude to greater advantage. The following is 
Dr. Robinson’s description of this important locality: ‘* This is a 
narrow, naked ridge of limestone rock, rising gradually from the 
northern end (of the city), and terminating abruptly on the south, 
over against the west end of the Acropolis, from which it bears 
about north ; being separated from it by an elevated valley. This 
southern end is fifty or sixty feet above the said valley ; though yet 
much lower than the Acropolis. On its top are still to be seen the 
seats of the judges and parties, hewn in the rock ; and towards the 
southwest is a descent by a flight of steps, also cut in the rock, into 
the valley below. Standing on this elevated platform, surrounded 
by the learned and the wise of Athens, the multitude perhaps being 
on the steps and in the vale below, Paul had directly before him the 
far-famed Acropolis, with its wonders of Grecian art; and beneath 
him, on his left, the majestic Theseium, the earliest and still most 
perfect of Athenian structures ; while all around, other temples and 
altars filled the whole city. On the Acropolis, too, were the three 


Ct Sen = - > : 
Se en ee a ES a ee ae oe a re 


4. 


;. eS 


CHAP. XVII. 19.] NOTES. 239 


celebrated statues of Minerva: one of olive-wood; another of gold 
and ivory in the Parthenon, the masterpiece of Phidias; and the 
colossal statue in the open air, the point of whose spear was seen 
over the Parthenon by those sailing along the gulf.” Bibl. Res. 
I. p. 10 sq. It is obvious that the peculiar boldness and power of 
Paul’s speech can be adequately realized only as we keep in mind 
the impressive outward scene which was here spread around him. 
Instead of understanding émt tov "Apesov mayoy in this manner, 
some translate before the Areiopagus (comp. 16, 19; 18, 12; 24, 
8), and maintain that Paul was arraigned at this time before the 
celebrated court of that name, and underwent a formal trial on the 
charge of having attempted to change the religion of the state. 
But this opinion rests entirely upon two or three expressions, which, 
like the one just noticed, are ambiguous in themselves; while in 
other respects the entire narrative, as well as the improbability of 
such a procedure, testify against the idea. First, we find here no 
trace whatever of any thing like the formality of a legal process. 
Secondly, the professed object of bringing the apostle émi rév ”Apecoy 
mayov was to ascertain from him what his opinions were, not to put 
him on his defence for them before they were known. Thirdly, 
the manner in which the affair terminated would have been a singu- 
lar issue for a judicial investigation in the highest court of Athens. 
And, finally, the speech which Paul delivered on the occasion was 
precisely such as we should expect before a promiscuous assembly ; 
whereas, if he had stood now as an accused person before a legal 
tribunal, his plea has most strangely failed to connect itself, at any 
single point, with that peculiarity of his situation. . It proves nothing 
in regard to the question, to show that the court of the Areiopagus 
had powers (that is admitted) which would have given to it jurisdic- 
tion in the case of Paul, supposing that he had been charged at this 
time with subverting the established worship ; since the narrative on 
which we must rely for our information as to what was done, not 
only contains no evidence that the Athenians took this serious view 
of his doctrine, but ascribes their eagerness to hear him to a mere 
love of novelty; see v. 21. Calvin, Kuinoel, Neander, Winer, 
Olshausen, De Wette, Meyer, Baur, Doddridge, and the best crit- 
ics generally, at present, reject the opinion that Paul was carried 
before the Areiopagus for a judicial examination. The authority 
of Chrysostom, among the ancient critics, stands in favor of it, A 
few among the Germans, as Hess, Hemsen, Scholz, follow on that 


240 NOTES. [CHAP. XVII. 19-21. 


side ; except that some of them would say (this is true of Hemsen), 
that the Areiopagus was called together, not exactly to try the apos- 
tle, but to hear from him some account of his doctrine. Many of 
our English writers in like manner take it for granted that Paul was 
arraigned at this time as a religious innovator. The other am- 
biguous expressions, which have been supposed to favor this view, 
will be noticed in their place. —dvvdueba yrdva, Can we know ? 
Would it not have been an excess even of the Attic politeness, to 
have interrogated a prisoner at the bar in this manner? The ob- 
ject, too, of the inquiry, as defined by the accompanying terms, 
shows clearly that they did not regard him as occupying that posi- 
tion. 

V. 20. éevigovra, surprising, since the things were foreign, un- 
heard of before. — ciogépers .... av. This phrase, drawn from 
common life, has an appearance of reality in this connection. — ri 
av 6éko0. See on v. 18. ri in apposition with radra should be 
noticed. It is not precisely like the plural. ‘The singular ri,” 
says Kriiger (Gr. § 61. 8. 2), “ may stand in such connections as 
ri ravrd éort, When the question is, what sort of a whole, what com- 
bined result, do the particulars form? ” 

V. 21. The object of this verse is to explain why they addressed 
to him such inquiries. Their motive for proposing them was that 
their curiosity might be gratified. —’A@nvaior d¢ mavres, now all Athe- 
nians. ‘The omission of the article unites the characteristic more 
closely with the name, as its invariable attendant. W. § 17. 10.b; 
K. § 246. 5. a.— oi émidnpotrres, i. e. the foreigners permanently 
resident there (comp. 2, 10) ; unde tidem mores, as Bengel remarks. 
— «is obdév.... edxaipovr, spent their leisure for nothing else. The 
imperfect does not exclude the continued existence of the peculiar- 
ity, but blends the reference to it with the history. See similar 
examples in 27, 8; John 11, 18; 18,1; 19,14. K. § 256. 4. a; 
C. 567. y. — xawérepov, newer, sc. than before. W. § 36.3; 5. 
§ 118.4; K.§ 323,R.7. The comparative or the positive form of 
the adjective could be used in this phrase; but the former charac- 
terizes their state of mind more forcibly than the latter. Bengel 
has hit the point of the idiom: ‘ Nova statim sordebant ; noviora 
querebantur.”? —It is worth remarking, that this singular scene of 
setting up the apostle to speak for the entertainment of the people 
occurs, not at Ephesus, or Philippi, or Corinth, but at Athens ; not 
only the only place, in all his journeyings, where Paul met with 


CHAP. XVII. 21.] NOTES. 241 


such a reception, but just the place where the incident arises in per- 
fect harmony with the disposition and the tastes of the people. We 
know, from the testimony of ancient writers, that this fondness for 
hearing and telling some new thing, which Luke mentions, was a 
notorious characteristic of the Athenians. Their great orator re- 
proaches them with the same propensity : BovAecde, eimé pot, reptidy- 
Tes attav muvOdverOa kata Ty dyopdy* Neyeral Tt kawvov ; (Philipp. I. 43.) 
The entirely incidental manner in which the exemplification of this 
trait comes forth in the narrative here, bears witness to its authen- 
ticity. 
Outline of the Course of Thought. 


The speech which Paul delivered at this time is remarkable for 
its adaptation, not only to the outward circumstances under which 
he spoke, but to the peculiar mental state of his auditors. De 
Wette pronounces it “a model of the apologetic style of dis- 
course.” ‘The address of Paul before this assembly,” says 
Neander, “ is a living proof of his apostolic wisdom and eloquence ; 
we perceive here how the apostle, according ‘to"his own expression, 
could become also a heathen to the heathen, that: he might win the 
heathen to a reception of the gospel.” ‘ The skill,” says Hemsen, 
‘‘ with which he was able to bring the truth near to the Athenians, 
deserves admiration. We find in this discourse of Paul nothing of 
an ill-timed zeal, nothing like declamatory pomp ; it is distinguished 
for clearness, brevity, coherence, and simplicity of representation.” 
Dr. Robinson, speaking under the impression produced on his mind 
by a personal survey of the scene, says that, “‘ masterly” as the 
- address is, as we read it under ordinary circumstances, “ the full 
force and energy and boldness of the apostle’s language can be 
duly felt only when one has stood upon the spot.” * 

We have first the introduction, which, in the technical language 
of rhetoric, is eminently conciliatory. ‘The apostle begins by ac- 





* Some object that the speech has been over-praised, because Paul did 
not succeed in bringing it to a formal close. The astonishment which one 
feels as he reads the address is not that the speaker was interrupted at 
length, when he came to announce to the Athenians the peculiar doctrines 
of Christianity, but that he could command their attention so long, while 
he bore down with such effect on their favorite opinions and prejudices, ex- 
posed their errors, and arraigned them as guilty of the grossest inconsisten- 
cy and absurdity of conduct. 


31 


242 NOTES. [cHAP. XVII. 21. 


knowledging and commending the respect of the Athenians for re- 
ligion (v. 22, 23). He states next, at the close of v. 23, his design, 
which is to guide their religious instincts and aspirations to their 
proper object, i. e. to teach them what God is, his nature and attri- 
butes, in opposition to their false views and practices as idolaters. 
He goes on, then, in pursuance of this purpose, to announce to 
them, first, that God is the Creator of the outward, material uni- 
verse (v. 24); secondly, that he is entirely independent of his 
creatures, having all-sufficiency in himself (v. 25); thirdly, that 
he is the Creator of all mankind, notwithstanding their separation 
into so many nations and their wide dispersion on the earth (v. 26) ; 
and, fourthly, that he has placed men, as individuals and nations, 
in such relations of dependence on himself as render it easy for 
them to see that he is their Creator and sovereign Disposer, and 
that they are the creatures of his power and goodness; and that it 
is their duty to seek and serve him (v. 27, 28). The ground has 
thus been won for the application which follows. At this point of 
the discourse, stretching forth his hand, as we may well suppose, 
towards the gorgeous images within sight, he exclaims: ‘ We 
ought not, therefore, to suppose that the Deity is like unto gold, or 
silver, or stone, sculptured by the art and device of men” (vy. 29). 
And that which men ought not to do, they may not safely do any 
longer. It was owing to the forbearance of God that they had 
been left hitherto to pursue their idolatry without any signal mani- 
festation of his displeasure ; they were now required to repent of 
it and forsake it (v. 30), because a day of righteous judgment 
awaited them, which had been rendered certain by the resurrection 
of Christ (v. 31). Here their clamors interrupted him. It is not 
difficult, perhaps, to conjecture what he would have added. It only 
remained, in order to complete his well-known circle of thought on 
such occasions, that he should have set forth the claims of Christ 
as the object of religious hope and confidence, that he should have 
exhorted them to call on his name and be saved. 

It will be seen, therefore, by casting the eye back, that we have 
here all the parts of a perfect discourse, viz. the exordium, the 
proposition or theme, the proof or exposition, the inferences and 
application. It is a beautiful specimen of the manner in which a 
powerful and well-trained mind, practised in public speaking, con- 
forms spontaneously to the rules of the severest logic. One can 
readily believe, looking at this feature of the discourse, that it was 





a ES ac ee 


Ae es ae 
Ny ott 3, 


CHAP. XVII. 21-23.] NOTES. 243 


pronounced by the man who wrote the Epistles to the Romans and 
Galatians, where we see the same mental characteristics so strong- 
ly reflected. As we must suppose, at all events, that the general 
scheme of thought, the nexus of the argument, has been preserved, 
it does not affect our critical judgment of the discourse whether we 
maintain that it has been reported in full, or that a synopsis only 
has been given. On this point opinions differ. 


V. 22-31. The Speech of Paul on Mars’ Hill. 


V. 22. ev péo@ tod ’Apeiov maéyou could be said of a place or an 
assembly. It is one of the ambiguous expressions adverted to 
above (p. 239), which leave it uncertain whether ’Apeiov mdyov is to 
be understood of the hill or the court assembled there. — dvdpes ’AGn- 
vaio. ‘The remark just made is to be repeated here. It is the style 
of address which Paul would necessarily use in speaking to a con- 
course of Athenians; and at the same time, he might use it in 
speaking before judges. In the latter case, however, the Greeks 
oftener said & dydpes dixacrai. See Stallb. Plat. Apol. 17. A. — card 
mavra, in every respect, as it were, in every possible mode of exhi- 
bition. — as devowdapoveorépovs byas bewpd, as (i. e. those who cor- 
respond to this character) more religious, sc. than others, I see 
you (De Wet., Win.). See W. § 36. R. 3. For the suppressed 
term of the comparison, see on v. 21. derorSaipoveotépovs (a vor 
media) may signify also more superstitious. It is improbable, as a 
matter of just rhetoric, that the apostle employed it in that reproach- 
ful sense at the outset of his remarks. That he used it in a good 
sense is evident for another reason. ‘* He proceeds to deduce their 


seeking after God (which he doubtless considered as something 


good) from this Sedapovia (comp. 25, 19), or religious propen- 
sity, so prevalent among the Athenians. He announced himself as 
one who would guide their dSecovdapovia, not rightly conscious of its 
object and aim, to a state of clear self-consciousness by a revela- 
tion of the object to which it thus ignorantly tended.” (Neand.) 
V. 23. kat dvabewpav .... Bopor, and closely observing the ob- 
jects of your religious veneration, I found also an altar. ceBéopa- 
ra denotes, not acts of worship, devotions (Eng. vers.), but tem- 
ples, images, altars, and the like. It is a generic term, under which 
kai arranges Bopdv as one of the class. —éneyéyparro (pluperf.), 
had been inscribed, includes the present, and is to be explained like 
the imperfect in v. 21. — dyvaar@ bed, to an unknown God. “That 


244 NOTES. [CHAP. XVII. 23. 


there was, at least, one altar at Athens with this inscription,” says 
Meyer, ‘* would appear as historically certain from this passage it- 
self, even though other testimonies were wanting, since Paul ap- 
peals to a fact of his own observation, and that, too, in the presence 
of the Athenians themselves.” But the existence of such altars at 
Athens is well attested by competent witnesses. Philostratus, in 
his Life of Apollonius (6. 2), says: cappovéctepov rept mavrav beady 
ed Aeyew kal ratra AOnryow, ob Kal dyyootov Oedv Bopor ipuvrat, i. e. 
dt is more discreet to speak well of all the gods, and especially at 
Athens, where are erected altars also of unknown gods. Pausanias, 
in his Description of Attica (1. 1), says that such altars (Bapot bedv 
dyvoorwv) existed at Phaleron, one of the harbors of Athens. It 
has been made a question, how we are to understand the use of the 
plural in these passages ; whether as referring to the number of the 
altars on which the inscription occurred, or to the number of the 
gods to whom the altars were dedicated. Some have assumed the 
latter as the correct view; and have said that Paul has arbitrarily 
changed the plural into the singular, in order to accommodate the 
fact to his purpose ; or even that the writer, by this inaccuracy, has 
betrayed himself as a person who had no direct knowledge of the 
circumstances which he professes to relate. But even if the in- 
scription on these altars was in the plural, it does not follow that 
Paul may not have found one having the language which he recites. 
Here would be Luke’s positive testimony to the fact, and that out- 
weighs the mere silence of other writers. Such appears to be Ben- 
gel’s view. Again, it would not follow that he has necessarily mis- 
represented the sense, admitting that he may have substituted the 
singular for the plural. The heathen writers often employed 6eoé 
to convey the general idea of divine power, providence, deity, and 
the like.* With that meaning, the plural could be relinquished for 
the singular, or the singular for the plural, just as an individual 
pleased. Here the apostle might have preferred 66, merely for 
the sake of its stricter formal accordance with the doctrine which 
he was about to advance. Kuinoel appears at a loss to decide 
whether the plural in the case under remark has reference to the 
number of the altars, or to that of the gods. Some, as Calvin and 
Olshausen, apparently concede that Paul deviated from the strict 





“ For examples of this interchange, see the passages collected by Pfan- 
ner in his Systema Theologie Gentilis Purioris, p- 102, and elsewhere. 


ce 


Ts.” ene 


CHAP. XVII. 23. ] NOTES. 245 


form of the inscription, but deny that he violated its proper import, 
or availed himself of any unworthy artifice. 

But even the appearance of a difficulty here vanishes entirely, 
when we give to the language of Philostratus and Pausanias the in- 
terpretation, which is beyond any reasonable doubt the correct one. 
Winer states his view of the case thus: “It by no means follows 
from the passages (of the writers above named), that each single 
one of the altars mentioned by them had the inscription éyydcras 
@cois in the plural, but more naturally that each one separately was 
dedicated dyvéorw Oe6 ; but this singular the narrators were obliged 
to change into the plural, because they spoke of all those altars in 
a collective way. It appears, therefore, that there were several 
altars in different places at Athens with the inscription dyvoore 
66.” See his Realw. I. p. 111. Such is the decision, also, of Eich- 
horn, Hess, Hemsen, Meyer, De Wette, and others. It should be 
added that several of the older commentators render dyvacre bed 
to the unknown God, supposing the God of the Jews, i. e. Jehovah, 
to be meant. Such a view mistranslates the Greek, and violates all 
historical probability. 

The precise historical origin of the altars at,;Athens bearing this 
inscription has been disputed. The conjectures are various. One 
is that they were very ancient, and that it was at length forgotten to 
whom they had been originally built; and that the words in ques- 
tion were placed on them at a later period, to apprise the people 
that it was unknown to what gods they belonged. If that was their 
character, it is not easy to see what proper point of connection the 
apostle could have found for his remark with such a relic of sheer 
idolatry. Another is, that, in some time or times of public calami- 
ty, the Athenians, not knowing what god they had offended, whether 
Minerva or Jupiter or Mars, erected these altars so as to be sure of 
propitiating the right one. The same objection may be made as 
before ; since their ignorance in this case relates merely to the 
identity of the god whom they should conciliate, and involves no 
recognition of any power additional to their heathen deities. The 
most rational explanation is unquestionably that of those who sup- 
pose these altars to have had their origin in the feeling of uncer- 
tainty, inherent, after all, in the minds of the heathen, whether their 
acknowledgment of the superior powers was sufficiently full and 
comprehensive ; in their distinct consciousness of the limitation 
and imperfection of their religious views, and their consequent de- 


246 NOTES. [CHAP. XVII. 23. 


sire to avoid the anger of any still unacknowledged god who might 
be unknown to them. That no deity might punish them for neg- 
lecting his worship, or remain uninvoked in’ asking for blessings, 
they not only erected altars to all the gods named or known among 
them, but, distrustful still lest they might not comprehend fully the 
extent of their subjection and dependence, they erected them also 
to any other god or power that might exist, although as yet unre- 
vealed to them. 

No one can say that this explanation ascribes too much discern- 
ment to the heathen. Not to insist on other proofs, such expressions 
as the comprehensive address, — At o deorum quicquid in celo 
regit ;* the oft-used formula in the prayers of the Greeks and Ro- 
mans, Si deo, si dea; and the superstitious dread, which they 
manifested in so many ways, of omitting any deity in their invoca- 
tions, prove the existence of the feeling to which reference has been 
made. Out of this feeling, therefore, these altars may have sprung ; 
because the supposition is so entirely consistent with the genius of 
polytheistic heathenism ; because the many-sided religiousness of 
the Athenians would be so apt to exhibit itself in some such demon- 
stration; and, especially, because Paul could then appeal with so 
much effect to such an avowal of the insufficiency of heathenism, 
and to such a testimony so borne, indirect, yet significant, to the 
existence of the one true God. Under these circumstances, an al- 
lusion to one of these altars by the apostle would be equivalent to 
his saying to the Athenians thus: “ You are correct in acknowledg- 
ing a divine existence beyond any which the ordinary rites of your 
worship recognize; there is such an existence. You are correct in 
confessing that this Being is unknown to you; you have no just con- 
ceptions of his nature and perfections.” He could add then with 
truth: ov odv.... Karayyé\Aw tyiv, Whom, therefore, not knowing, 
ye worship, this one I announce unto you. ‘The inverted order 
gives point to the declaration. dyvootyres has the same object as 
the verb, and means having no just knowledge of him whom 
they worshipped; not ignorantly, as if they did not know whither 
their worship was directed. ‘The word points back evidently to 
dyvaor@. evoeBeire has seemed to some a strong term, as the cog- 
nate words in the New Testament always express the idea of true 
piety ; but the term occurs further only in 1 Tim. 5,4, and denotes 





* Horat. Epod. 5. 1. 


CHAP. XVII. 23-26. | NOTES. 247 


there, not the exercise of piety, but of something merely kindred to 
it, filial reverence. It needs only a similar modification to adapt it 
to the use required here. 

V. 24. The God whom Paul announced is the Maker of all 
things, and, as such, necessarily distinct from their false gods. 
That is the point of connection between this verse and the preced- 
ing. — odros .... imdpyxav, this one (by his right as Creator) being 
the Lord, Sovereign, of heaven and earth. It was self-evident, 
therefore, that he was not to be confounded with any of their idols, 


- whose existence was limited by the space which they occupied. — 


xetporoujrors is contrasted with 6 momoas .... év avTd.— ev vaois. 
The statues or images were kept in the recesses of the temple. — 
xatouxei. 'The mass of the heathen in practice’made no difference 
between the symbol and its object; the block was the god (comp. 
19, 26). 

V. 25. The apostle illustrates the character of the true God 
still further, by another contrast between him and the deities of the 
heathen. He is independent of his creatures; he needs nothing 
from them; they can earn no merit by serving him. — ovdé.... 
Ocpanevera, and (after a preceding negative) he is not ministered 


unto by the hands of men. ‘The heathen considered it meritorious 


to lavish wealth on the temples and shrines of their idols; they 
brought to them costly gifts, and even offerings of food and drink, 
as if they stood in need of such things, and could be laid under 
obligation to their worshippers. That prayer, of Chryses, priest of 
Apollo, in Il. 1. 37 sq., expresses the true spirit of heathenism in 
this respect : 
“Tf e’er with wreaths I hung thy sacred fane, 

Or fed the flames with fat of oxen slain, 

God of the silver bow! thy shafts employ, 

Avenge thy servant, and the Greeks destroy.” 
—airds d:dovs. The relation of the clause is causal : since he himself 
gives. The emphasis of the pronoun arises from its opposition to the 
idea of others giving to him. — ra ravra, the whole, i. e. of the things 
which they enjoy. In such an expression, rd restricts the adjective 
to the class of objects intimated by the preceding words or the con- 
text. Some editors omit the article here. Compare Rom. 8, 32; 
1 Cor. 9, 22; Phil. 3, 8, etc. But in most of these passages, too, 
the manuscripts fluctuate. 

V. 26. émoinaé re, x. 7. A., and he made of one blood every na- 


248 NOTES. [cHaP. XVII. 26. 


tion of men that they should dwell. This is the more obvious view 
of the construction, and is the one which has been generally 
adopted. Yet several of the best critics, as Kuinoel, De Wette, 
Meyer, regard moeiy here as an instance of its use with an accusa- 
tive and infinitive, like that in Matt. 5, 32; Mark 7, 37, and trans- 
late: and he caused every nation of men (sprung) from one blood 
to dwell. xaro.xeiy connects itself more easily in this way, it is true, 
with the rest of the sentence ; but the facility thus gained renders 
the expression hard at é€ évds aiyaros, so that we must supply a word 
to make the thought flow smoothly. The main idea beyond ques- 
tion is, that God has created the entire human race from a common 
stock ; and the more prominent way, therefore, in which the trans- 
lation first stated brings forward this proposition, appears to me to 
be a reason for preferring it. It is an objection to the other mode, 
that it assigns a too subordinate place to the principal thought. 
But why does the apostle single out thus the universal brotherhood 
of the race? Olshausen says it was intended as a reproof to the 
Athenians for their contempt of the Jews. Meyer, Neander, De 
Wette, and others, consider it as directed essentially against the 
polytheism of the heathen. If all are the children of a common 
parent, then the idea of a multiplicity of gods from whom the vari- 
ous nations have derived their origin, or whose protection they 
specially enjoy, must be false. The doctrine of the unity of the 
race is closely interwoven with that of the unity of the divine ex- 
istence. This more comprehensive view of the meaning, however, 
does not exclude the other ; since, if all nations have the same cre- 
ator, it would at once occur that nothing can be more absurd than 
the feeling of superiority and contempt with which one affects to 
look down upon another. As the apostle had to encounter the prej- 
udice which was entertained against him as a Jew, his course of 
remark was doubly pertinent, if adapted at the same time to re- 
move this hinderance to a candid reception of his message. 
karotkeiy is the infinitive of design. The various lands which the 
different families of mankind occupied, with all the advantages con- 
nected with their position, God had assigned to them; comp. Deut. 32, 
8; Ps. 115,16. Yea, he had proceeded from the very first with a view 
to their welfare. He designed, in creating men, that they should in- 
habit and possess the earth as their own ; that they should all of them 
enjoy the manifold blessings allotted to them in the various places of 
their abode. It was to him that they were indebted for what they 


CHAP. XVII. 26.] NOTES. 249 


enjoyed, and not to accident, or their own enterprise, or the favor of 
some imaginary god. The remark, made as applicable to all lands, 
has its justification in the fact, that, notwithstanding the inequalities 
which diversify the condition of nations, they have severally their pe- 
culiar advantages ; it is natural for every people to esteem their own 
country, in some respects at least, as the best.* But the remark 
was specially aimed, beyond doubt, at the feeling of self-congratu- 
lation with which the Athenians were prone to contemplate the 
peculiar felicity of their own position, their national renown, their 
past and present prosperity. ‘This view of the meaning prepares 
the way for the thought which is next introduced. — épicas .... rijs 
katotkias avtav, having fixed the appointed seasons and limits of 
their abode. ‘The second participle repeats the idea of the first, 
not superfluously, but with the evident effect of affirming it more 
strongly. The approved reading is apooreraypévovs, rather than 
mporeraypévous as in the common text. The apostle, by adding this, 
admonishes the Athenians that they, like every other people, had 
not only received their peculiar advantages from the common Cre- 
ator, but that they could hold them only during the continuance of 
his good-will and favor. In assigning to the nations their respective 
abodes, he had fixed both the seasons of their prosperity and the 
limits of their territory, i. e. it was he who decided when and how 
long they should flourish, and .how far their dominion should ex- 
tend. ‘The remark was adapted both to rebuke their spirit of self- 
elation, and to warn them of the danger of slighting a message from 
Him who had their destiny so perfectly at his command. 

Another interpretation of these last words has been extensively 
- received, which is plainly incorrect. Some have explained them 
as referring to the limits which God has assigned to the lives of 
men individually: they have their appointed seasons and bounds, 
beyond which they cannot pass. But that idea lies out of the pres- 
ent circle of view, as the subject of discourse here relates to nations 
and not to individuals. It is also philologically inadmissible ; since 
avray-can naturally refer to dvOp#zev only as connected with wav 
€6vos. — The anti-polytheistic aim, which forms to such an extent 
the ground-tone of the discourse, is to be recognized perhaps, also, 
in this part of it. The separation of men into so many different 


\ 





* Tacitus has recognized this principle in his fine remark (Germ. § 2), — 
‘“‘ Informem terris, asperam ceelo, nist si patria sit.” 


32 


250 NOTES. [ CHAP. XVII. 26, 27. 


nations might seem to oppose the idea of their common parentage ; 
that separation itself is, therefore, represented by the apostle as 
having been contemplated in the divine plan. —It will be observed 
that what the apostle affirms in this verse as true of God is, also, 
intended to be denied in regard to polytheism. The conception, 
therefore, thus brought before the minds of his heathen auditors, 
was a vast one. All that power exerted in giving existence to 
men, controlling their destiny, exalting entire nations or casting 
them down, which they had parcelled out among such an infinity 
of gods, they are now led to concentrate in a single possessor ; 
they obtain the idea of one infinite Creator and Ruler. 

V. 27. nreiv, telic, that they should seek. ‘This infinitive attaches 
itself more particularly to the part of the sentence which commences 
at xarotxeiv, and states the moral object which God had in view with 
reference to men, in making such provision for their convenience 
and happiness. . It was that they might be led, by such tokens of 
his goodness, to seek him, i. e. a more perfect knowledge of him 
and of their obligations to him. Some, on the contrary, make the 
infinitive depend, almost wholly, on the clause just before, and find 
the connection to be this: that, excited by the proofs of his power, 
as manifested in the varying fortunes of nations, they should seek, 
etc. But as already explained, the controlling idea in that clause 
is that of the goodness of God (subject, as to its continuance, to 
the divine pleasure) ; while that of his power, as displayed in the 
infliction of judgments, is only incidentally involved. Again, that 
clause is a subordinate one, as its structure shows, and that it should 
break off ¢nreiv so much from the main part of the sentence would 
be violent. — ei dpaye .... evpoev, if perhaps they might feel after 
him and find him. »Wndadjceay denotes, properly, the motions of a 
blind man, who gropes along after an object in the dark. On the 
peculiar AZolic termination, see W.§ 13. 2.d; K.§ 116. 9; B. 
§ 103. marg. 14. This verb is chosen, as well as the problematical 
form of the expression (ei dpaye), because the apostle would con- 
cede the comparative indistinctness of the light which the heathen 
have to guide them. — kairovye, although indeed. This clause is 
added to show that the concession just made was not intended to 
exculpate the heathen for their estrangement from God. Although 
so benighted as to be compelled to grope for the object of their 
search, it was still within reach; they had not, after all, so far to 
go for a knowledge of God, that they might not find it if they 


CHAP. XVII. 27-29.] NOTES. 251 


would. Compare the sentiment with 14, 17, and especially with 
Rom. 1, 20. 

V. 28. <Gyev kat xvotpeba kai éopev. We are not, I suppose, to 
insist on a sharp distinction between these verbs; they present the 
idea on every side. We derive our existence solely from God; we 
depend on him, every instant, for life, motion, thought, all our 
varied activity. From creatures thus dependent, the evidence of a 
Creator cannot be very deeply hidden, if they have only a disposi- 
tion to seek for it. — ds kai, as also, i. e. the sentiment is not only 
true, but has been acknowledged. — xa? ipas, among you, i. e. 
Greeks in distinction from Jews; not Athenians in distinction from 
other Greeks. — rod yap kal yévos éopev, For his offspring also are 
we. Derivation implies dependence. ‘The creature cannot exist 
apart from the Creator. The apostle brings forward the citation 
correctly, therefore, as parallel in sentiment to év avré.... éoper. 
He quotes it as an avowal that we owe our being and its preserva- 
tion to a higher Power; the mythological idea of Jupiter does not 
enter into the meaning. ov stands here for the pronoun. W. 
§ 20.2; S.§ 94.1. The words form the first half of a hexame- 


ter, and are found in Aratus, a Cilician poet, who flourished about 


B. C. 270. The celebrated Hymn of Cleanthes to Jupiter (v. 5) 
contains almost the same words, viz. é« aod yap yevos éopev. . The 
same idea, variously expressed, occurs in several other Greek writ- 
ers. The form of the citation the apostle took, undoubtedly, from 
Aratus, but says rwés ecipyxact because he would generalize the 
idea as if he had said, The truth is so plain that even your poetry 
recognizes it (see on v. 18). According to some, he uses the plural 


' because he had in mind other passages where the thought is found ; 


or, according to others, because he inferred that so obvious a re- 
mark must be a common one. yup kai, as Meyer observes correct- 
ly, has no logical connection with Paul’s speech, but is to be viewed 
merely as a part of the citation, which it was necessary to retain on 
account of the verse. 

V. 29. -yévos odv, x. r. X., Since, therefore, we are the offspring 
of God. The inference drawn here is, that idolatry is supremely 
absurd, inasmuch as it makes that which is destitute of life, motion, 
intelligence, the source of these attributes to others. Compare Isa. 
44, 9 sq. — xapdypars stands in apposition with the nouns which 
precede, i, e. the state or form of the materials just enumerated, 
artificially wrought. 


252 NOTES. [CHAP. XVII. 30, 31. 


V. 30. The relation of this verse and the one following to the 
preceding verse is this: Since such is the nature of idolatry, you 
must therefore (odv) repent of it, because God now lays upon you 
his command to this effect, in view of the retributions of a judg- 
ment to come. The most important word here is imepidav. It 
does not occur further in the New Testament, but is found often in 
the Septuagint, where it signifies to neglect, which is its proper 
classical sense, then to despise, but especially to suffer to pass as if 
unnoticed, to withhold the proof of noticing a thing which is, at the 
same time, a matter of distinct knowledge ; a frequent sense of 
py in Hiphil and Hithpael (see Deut. 22, 3. 4, etc.). In this last 
signification, the verb represents perfectly the apostle’s meaning 
here. God had hitherto permitted the heathen to pursue their own 
way, without manifesting his sense of their conduct, either by send- 
ing to them special messengers to testify against’ it, as he did to the 
Jews, or by inflicting upon them at once the punishment deserved. 
The idea is virtually the same, therefore, as that of etace in 14, 16, 
and apédexev in Rom. 1, 24. To understand imepidoy as meaning 
that God would not judge or punish the heathen for the sins com- 
mitted in their state of idolatry, would be at variance with Paul’s 
theology on this subject as he has unfolded it in Rom. 1, 20; 2, 
11 sq. Not only so, but the repentance which the apostle now 
calls upon them to exercise presupposes their guilt. 

V.31. ddr, because, states the reason why the heathen also, as 
well as others, must repent; they could not, without this prepara- 
tion, be safe in the day of righteous judgment which awaited them. 
— év dvdpi & apie, by the man whom he has appointed. dvdpi omits 
the article because a definite clause follows. W. § 19. 4; S. 
§ 89. 3. 6 stands, by attraction, for the accusative. — miorw mapa- 
cxav raow, having afforded assurance to all, confirmation, viz. of a 
judgment to come. ‘The sentence being left incomplete, it is im- 
possible to say just how much the apostle intended to represent as 
proved by the resurrection of Christ. He himself referred to it, 
undoubtedly, in the first place, as establishing the possibility of such 
a resurrection of all men from the dead as was involved in his doc- 
trine of a general judgment; but whether he had yet developed 
this doctrine so far that the Athenians perceived already this bear- 
ing of the fact, is uncertain. It was enough to excite their scorn 
to hear of a single instance of resurrection. Again, the resurrec- 
tion of Christ from the dead confirms the truth of all his claims ; 


i" b 
Se ee 


CHAP. XVII. 31—34.] NOTES. 253 


and one of these was that he was to be the judge of men; see 
John 5,28. 29. But whether the apostle meant to extend the argu- 
ment to these and other points, we cannot decide, as he was so 
abruptly silenced. 


V. 32-34. Paul is interrupted and leaves the Assembly. 


V. 32. The apostle was heard with attention until he came to 
speak of the resurrection; when, at the announcement of a doc- 
trine which sounded so strangely to the ears of the Athenians, some 
of them broke forth into expressions of open contempt. — dvdcraow 
vexpav, a resurrection of the dead. As we do not know how much 
of Paul’s idea the Athenians had apprehended, it is doubtful whether 
we are to take the plural here as generic or numerical, i. e. whether 
Christ merely be meant, or men in general. For vexpoi, without 
the article, comp. 3, 15; 4,2. 10, ete. W.§ 18. 1.— dkovodpeba 

.. mepi tovrov. It is disputed whether we are to understand this 
as said seriously, or as a courteous refusal to hear any thing further 
on the subject. The latter is the prevalent view (Hnr., Kuin., 
Hems., De Wet., Mey., Blmf.). The manner in which Paul now 
left the assembly, the immediate termination of his labors at Ath- 
ens, and the adversative é¢ in v. 34, favor this interpretation. Such 
a mode of speaking, too, was entirely consonant to the Athenian 
character. Calvin, Grotius, Rosenmiller, are among those who 
impute a serious meaning to the language; they follow the literal 
import of the words. | 

V. 33. kai ovrws, and thus, i. e. after these events, or with such 
a result; comp. 20, 11; 28, 14.—ék pécou airady, i. e. of those 

-whom he had addressed ; not from the city (comp. 18, 1). 

V. 34. ries 8¢, but certain (Mey., De Wet.), appears to be 
contrasted, in the writer’s mind, with what is stated in v. 32, re- 
specting the effect of Paul’s speech; the favorable is opposed to 
the unfavorable. .Yet 6¢ may be continuative.— xodAnOérres aire, 
not adhering, but joining, attaching themselves, to him. — 6 ’Apeo- 
nayirns, the Areopagite, i. e. one of the judges in the court of the 
Areiopagus. The number of these judges varied at different 
times. Eusebius and other ancient writers say that this Dionysius 
became afterwards bishop of the church at Athens, and ended his 
life as a martyr. — kal yun, and a woman, not the wife of Dionysius, 
as some have said, for the article and pronoun would then have 
been added (comp. 5, 1); or at least the article (comp. 24, 24). 


254 NOTES. [CHAP. XVII. 34— XVIII. 2. 


It has been inferred, from her being singled out thus by name, 


that she was a woman of rank, but beyond this, nothing is known 
of her. 





CHAPTER XVIIL. 


V.1-11. Arrival of Paul at Corinth, and his Labors there. 


V. 1. é ray ’AOnvav. Wieseler limits the apostle’s stay at 
Athens to fourteen days. The estimate is necessarily conjectural. 
It is certain that, although Paul spent the most of the two next 
years in Corinth and the vicinity, he did not direct his steps again 
to that city. On his third missionary tour, he came once more 
into this part of Greece, but at that time passed by Athens, certainly 
once and again, without repeating his visit thither, — eis Képwov. 
It was easy to go from Athens to Corinth in two days. (Wiesl.) 
This well-known city was now the seat of the Roman proconsulate 
for Achaia, or the southern province of Greece. ‘ In consequence 
of its situation,” says Neander, “ Corinth furnished a very impor- 
tant central point for the extension of the gospel in a great part of 
the Roman empire ; and hence Paul remained here, as in other 
similar cities, a longer time than was otherwise usual for him.” 

V.2. ’Axtrav. The nominative is ’AxvAas (v. 26). Aquila and 
Priscilla, or Prisca (Rom. 16, 3), were Roman names ; and it was 
common for Jews to assume such names out of Palestine; see on 
13,9. That Aquila was born in Pontus harmonizes with 2, 9 ; 
1 Pet. 1, 1. As we have no account of his conversion at Corinth, 
the probability is that he became a Christian at Rome. So Hemsen, 
Olshausen, Neander, Wieseler, and others, conclude. Some allege 
Twa lovdaiov as proof that he was still unconverted (Mey., De Wet.) ; 
but he is introduced in that manner on account of what follows. 
The notice apprises us that he was one of the mdyras “Iovdaious, 
whom the decree banished. At this early period no distinction 
would be made between Jews and Jewish Christians. Aquila ac- 
companied Paul to Ephesus (v. 18, 26), and was still there when | 
the apostle wrote the First Epistle to the Corinthians (1 Cor. 16, 
19). We find him at Rome again when Paul wrote the Epistle to 
the Romans (Rom. 16, 3 sq.) ; and at a still later period at Ephe- 
sus a second time (2 Tim. 4, 19). The nature of his business 


CHAP. XVIII. 2, 3.] NOTES. 255 


(v. 3) led him frequently to change the place of his residence. — 
dia 7d Suareraxéva, x. 7. X. Luke refers unquestionably to the edict . 
mentioned by Suetonius (Claud. c. 25): ‘ Judeeos, impulsore 
Chresto, assidue tumultuantes Roma expulit.”” Neander remarks 
on that passage as follows: ‘*‘ We might suppose that some factious 
Jew then living, of this name, one of the numerous class of Jewish 
freedmen in Rome, was intended. But as no individual so univer- 
sally known as the Chrestus of Suetonius seems to have been con- 
sidered by that writer is elsewhere mentioned; and as Xpicros was 
frequently pronounced Xpjoros by the pagans; it is quite probable 
that Suetonius, who wrote half a century after the event, throwing 
together what he had heard about the political expectations of a 
Messiah among the Jews, and the obscure and confused accounts 
which may have reached him respecting Christ, was thus led to ex- 
press himself in a manner so vague and indefinite.”* The Roman 
historian does not mention the year of that expulsion, and we may 
suppose it to have been about A. D. 52, in accordance with our 
plan of chronology.t mpoopdras shows that it was still a recent 
event when Paul arrived at Corinth. 

V. 3. eipydafero, wrought, labored for his subsistence. He re- 
minds the Corinthians of this fact in 1 Cor. 9, 6 sq. and 2 Cor. 
11, '7 sq. — joav yap, x. tr. X., for they were tent-makers as to the 
trade (which they had). jy réymmy is a limiting accusative like rv 
tpérov in Jud. v.7. W.§ 32.6; K.§ 279. 7. The Jews, more 
especially after the exile, held the mechanic arts in high estima- 
tion. It was a proverb among them that the father who neglected 
to bring up his son to a trade taught him to be a thief. The com- 





* Church History, Vol. I. p. 94. 

t Some writers maintain that this decree is identical with that De mathe- 
maticis Italia pellendis, which Tacitus mentions (Ann. 12. 52); they sup- 
pose him to cite it under that title with reference to the particular offence 
which gave occasion to it. The mathematici, or Chald@i, as they were 
called, were banished on the ground of their aiding conspirators against the 
emperor by the use of their art as astrologers. Wieseler (p. 121 sq.) argues 
that the Jews may have been confounded with that class of men, and were 
consequently banished by the same decree. If that point were established, 
it would furnish a striking confirmation of the correctness of our chronolo- 
gy ; for the edict to which Tacitus refers can be shown to have been pub- 
lished in A. D. 52. But it must remain uncertain whether the two events 
have any chronological connection with each other. 


256 NOTES. [CHAP. XVIII. 3-7. 


position of oxyvorool indicates a definite sense. It is difficult to see 
why some should suppose it to mean manufacturers of tent-cloth. 
It has not been shown that the usage differed from the etymology. 
Tent-making was a common trade in Cilicia, the native country of 
the apostle. A coarse species of goat’s hair, called cilicium, was 
produced there in great abundance, and was much used for that 
purpose. A person accustomed to work on that material could 
work, doubtless, on any other. Paul had acquired the trade, in all 
probability, during his boyhood, while he lived at ‘Tarsus, _ 

V.4. °EAAnvas, sc. ceBopépovs, 1. e. Greek proselytes who attend- 
ed the synagogue ; comp. 18, 43; 14,1. The apostle had not yet 
addressed himself to the heathen ; see v. 6. 

V. 5. Macedonia denotes here the Roman province of that 
name, comprising Northern Greece as distinguished from Achaia, 
or Southern Greece ; see on v. 1. It is left uncertain, therefore, 
from what particular place Silas and Timothy arrived at this time. 
Compare on v. 16. — ovveixero 76 Adyo, was engrossed (lit. held to- 
gether) with the word (Vulg., Kuin., Olsh., De Wet., Rob.). The 
arrival of his associates relieved him from anxiety which had 
pressed heavily upon him (comp. 1 Thess. 3, 6 sq.) ; and he could 
now devote himself with unabated energy to his work. He had the 
support also of their personal codperation. We see from 2 Cor. 
1, 19, that Silas and Timothy took an active part in the proclama- 
tion of the gospel at Corinth. The common text has r@ mvedpart 
after ovveiyero: he was impelled by the Spirit, or by his own spirit, 
his fervent zeal (comp. v. 25). The evidence decides for ro Ady@ 
as the original word (Grsb., Mey., T’schdf.). 

V.6. BPracdnpotvray, sc. his words, message ; comp. 13, 45; 
19, 9. — éxrwakdpevos ra ipdria, shaking out his garments, i.e. the 
dust upon them, as a witness against them. For the significancy 
of the act, see on 13, 51. — 76 aia inary, your blood, i. e. the cause 
and guilt of your ruin; comp. 20,26; Ezek. 33, 5.— xaOapds éya, 
I am pure, have discharged my duty. — For eis 1a vn mopedoouat, 
see the Note on 13, 46. 

V.'7. peraBds éxcibev, departing from there, i. e. the synagogue 
(see v. 4), not from the city, or from the house of Aquila. — 7\éer, 
k. t.r., went into the house of a certain Justus. ‘The meaning is, 
not that he left Aquila and went to lodge with Justus, but that he 
preached in future at the house of the latter, which was so much the 
more convenient because it was near the synagogue where they had 





"3 ee oe . es: ae o> < z " + 
PR Se ap gee Se SO RE ee Let SE ee ee Pes 


CHAP. XVIII. 7—11.] NOTES. 257 


been accustomed to assemble. Paul pursued precisely the same 
course at Ephesus ; see 19, 9. — ceBopévov riv Oedv describes Justus 
as a foreigner who had embraced Judaism, but was not yet a be- 
liever. He opened his house for the use of the Christians, because 
he had more sympathy with them than with the Jews. His moral 
position was certainly unique ; and it is easy to believe that he soon 
exchanged it for that of a believer. 

V.8. Crispus was one of the few persons at Corinth whom 
Paul himself baptized ; see 1 Cor. 1, 14. — ody dd@ 1 oikw airod. 
Here is another instance in which an entire family believed ; comp. 
16, 15; 1 Cor. 1, 16. — ésiorevoy is imperfect, from the relation of 
the act to dxovovres. 

V.9. 8 épayaros. See on 16, 9.— py GoBod, Fear not. The 
form of the imperative implies that he was beginning to despond ; 
see the Note on 10, 15. — Adda, continue to speak. Observe the 
use of the subjunctive aorist in the next verb. 

V. 10. Kal ovdels, x. r. A., and no one shall attack thee (telic) to 
injure thee, i. e. no one shall attempt it with success (De Wet.) ; 
or ecbatic, so as to injure thee. The infinitive with rod denotes 
more commonly a’purpose. The Jews made an effort to destroy 
the apostle after this promise (v. 12 sq.), but were defeated. — d.dre 

.. mods, because I have much people, i. e. many who are ap- 
pointed to become such; see 18,48. Hence the activity of the 
apostle must have free scope until they were converted. 

V. 11. éxdOioe, x.r. X. . It has been questioned whether the year 
and six months embraced merely the time up to the arrest (v. 
12 sq.), or the apostle’s entire residence at Corinth. ‘I regard the 

latter view,” says Wieseler,* ‘as undoubtedly the correct one. 
This appears, in the first place, from the particle re, which connects 
this verse in the closest manner with what precedes, and conse- 
quently with eime 6é, x. r.A.: ‘The Lord said, Fear not, but speak 
and be not silent ;.... and so (W. § 57. 3) he abode a year and 
six months, teaching among them the word of God.’ The main 
thought of the words which the Lgrd addresses to Paul in the vision 
(v. 9, 10) is unquestionably, ‘ Speak in this city, and be not silent,’ 
and accordingly the period of time, in v. 11, during which the apos- 
tle obeys this command of Christ, must refer to the whole time in 
which he had spoken at Corinth and was not silent, i. e. must include 





* Chronologie des Apostolischen Zeitalters, p. 46. 
33 


258 NOTES. [CHAP. XVIII. 11-14, 


the time until his departure. In the second place, this follows from 
the general nature of the statement: ‘ he abode there a year and 
six months’; comp. Luke 24, 49.” Anger adopts the same con- 
clusion. De Wette calls it the prevalent view, but prefers the 
other. — év avrois, among them in the city (v. 10); see on 8, 5. 


V. 12-17. Paul is arraigned before Gallio. 


V. 12. Gallio was a brother of Seneca, the celebrated moralist. 
His original name was Novatus, which he exchanged for that of Gal- 
lio, in consequence of his being adopted by a distinguished rhetorician 
of that name. Seneca dedicated to him his books De Ira and De 
Vita Beata. He speaks of Gallio in one of his Letters (104) as 
having resided in Achaia, though he does not mention in what capa- 
city he was there. Luke’s narrative introduces him as acting a part 
in striking harmony with his reputed character. He was known 
among his contemporaries as the “ dulcis Gallio.”” He had the 
social qualities which make a man a universal favorite. ‘‘ Nemo 
mortalium,” says Seneca, “ uni tam dulcis est, quam hic omnibus.” 
(Quest. Nat., L. 4, Pref.) Luke’s oddev rovroy guedev in v. 17 
points significantly to one of the ordinary elements of personal 
popularity. Gallio, like his brother, was put to death by the mur- 
derous Nero. — dvéumaretorros rijs Axaias, was governing Achaia as 
proconsul. ‘That province (see on v. 1) comprehended Hellas and 
the Peloponnesus. Here, too, we have a striking example of Luke’s 
accuracy. Under Tiberius (Tac. Ann. 1. 76) and Caligula, the 
two preceding emperors, Achaia had been an imperial province, 
governed by propretors. But Claudius had restored it to the Senate 
(Suet. Claud., c. 25), and under that form of administration its 
governors were styled proconsuls. Paul was at Corinth in the 
reign of Claudius. Compare the Note on 13, '7. — éni 7d Bijpa, be- 
fore the tribunal. 

V. 18. apa rdv vopor, contrary to the law, not of the Romans, 
but of the Jews; comp. vopov tod caf tyas inv. 15. What Luke 
has stated here is a summary of the charge. That the Jews went 
more into detail is evident from Gallio’s reply in v. 13. 

V. 14. ddixnua and padiotpynpa designate the act perhaps legally 
and ethically : this, as an offence against morality; that, as an of- 
fence against the state or the personal rights of others. — ay nvecx6- 
pny ipav, I would have suffered you, would have listened patiently to 
your complaint, For dy with the aorist indicative in the subordinate 








CHAP. XVIII. 14—18.] * NOTES. 259 


clause, see W. § 43. 2. b; B. § 189.3. 2; K. § 327. b. He 
makes known his decision as a thing settled. 

V. 15. smepi Adyou, concerning a doctrine. — dvopdray, names, 
because they had accused Paul of teaching that Jesus was the 
Messiah, — xpirjs yap, x. r. A. It was out of his province to take 
cognizance of such questions. The Roman laws allowed the Jews 
to regulate their religious affairs in their own way. Lysias (23, 29) 
and Festus (25, 19) placed their refusal to interfere on the same 
ground. | 
V. 16. dzpdacev atro’s, drove them away, compelled them to 
retire. 

V.17. Sosthenes was probably the successor of Crispus (v. 8), 
or, as Biscoe conjectures, may have belonged to another synagogue 
in the city. He appears to have taken an active part in the prose- 
cution, and hence the Greeks, who were always ready to manifest 
their hatred of the Jews, singled him out as the object of their spe- 
cial resentment. In winking at this, says De Wette, Gallio may 
have carried his impartiality too far. If he was the Sosthenes who 
is called “a brother” in 1 Cor. 1, 1, he must have been converted 
after this, and have removed to Ephesus. The coincidence in the 
name is the only reason for supposing the same person to be 
meant in both places. — ovdev rovrwy includes most naturally the 
dispute between the Jews and Christians, as well as the abuse 
of Sosthenes. — gueAev, when used as a personal verb, requires in 
prose a neuter subject. K. § 274, R. 1; Mt. § 348, R.2. The 
indifference of Gallio is not mentioned in commendation of him, 
but as suggesting why the affair had such a termination. Owing 
to the proconsul’s disposition, the Jews were unsuccessful; so far 
from inflicting any injury on the apostle, their attempt recoiled in 
disgrace and violence on themselves, 


V. 18-23. Paul proceeds by the Way of Ephesus and Cesarea 
to Jerusalem, and from there to Antioch. 


V. 18. ru jpyépas ixavas, yet many days after the arrest; but 
whether the arrest took place at the end of the year and a half in 
vy. 11, or in the course of that time, depends on the answer to the 
question noticed on v.11. If we add the many days to the year anda 
half, it would not necessarily extend the period beyond a few months 
(Wiesl.).— During this abode at Corinth, the apostle planted 
churches in other parts of Achaia, either by his own personal 


260 NOTES. *® [CHAP. XVIII. 13. 


labors or by the instrumentality of his converts ; see 2 Cor. 1, 1. 
It was at this time, also, that Paul wrote the First and Second Epis- 
tles to the Thessalonians.* — droraéayuevos, having bid adieu, which 
is an Alexandrian sense; see Lob. ad Phryn., p. 24. Among 
others, he now took leave of Silas, and perhaps of Timothy, though 
we find the latter with him again at Ephesus (19, 22). — eis rip 
Supiay, unto Syria, as his remoter destination; he embarked for 
Ephesus in the first instance (v. 19). — xetpdpevos tiv xepadny re- 
fers to Paul (Chrys., Calv., Neand., Olsh., Hems., De Wet., Win.), 
not to Aquila (Kuin., Mey.). addos is the leading subject, and the 
reader connects the remark spontaneously with him. It is only as 
an act of reflection, on perceiving that ’AxvAas stands nearer, that the 
other connection occurs to the mind as a possible one. It is urged 
for the latter view, that Luke has placed the man’s name after that 
of the woman, contrary to the natural order; but that no stress can 
be laid on that circumstance is clear from Rom. 16, 3 and 2 Tim. 4, 
19, where the names follow each other in the same manner. Some 
principle of association, as possibly that of the relative superiority 
of Priscilla, made it customary to speak of them in that order. — 
év Keyypeais, in Cenchrea, which was the eastern port of Corinth, 
distant about ten miles. A church had been gathered here (Rom. 
16, 1). —etye yap evynv, for he had a vow, i.e. resting upon him ; 
not that he now assumed it. This clause states why he shaved his 
head. The cutting off of the hair was a Jewish practice, and took 
place at the expiration of a vow, not at the commencement of it. It 
is an erroneous statement, therefore, that the apostle subjected him- 
self to the vow at this time, and went to Jerusalem to obtain absolu- 
tion from it. Neander would support that opinion from Jos. Bel. Jud. 
2. 15; but he adopts for that purpose an interpretation of the passage 
which nearly all others reject. The nature of Paul’s vow on this 
occasion is uncertain.. It could not have been a strict Nazarite vow, 
i. e. such a vow observed in due form; for a person could absolve 
himself from such an obligation only at Jerusalem, where his hair 
which had grown during the time that he had been a Nazarite was 
to be cut off and burnt as an offering in the temple (Numb. 6, 
2 sq.). See Jahn’s Archeol. § 395. We have no account of any 
deviation.from that rule. Yet it is not unreasonable to suppose that 
in later times the original institution may have been relaxed or 





* See Appendix, No. 6. 


CHAP. XVIII. 18-22. | NOTES. 261 


modified ; that after the Jews came to be dispersed it was held to 
be lawful to terminate a Nazarite vow at other places, adhering to 
the prescribed usages as nearly as the circumstances allowed. If 
it was not a vow of this peculiar character, it may have been of the 
nature of a thank-offering, and not subject to the regulations to which 
the Nazarite was required to conform.» It must be confessed that 
the present knowledge of Jewish antiquities is not sufficient to clear 
up fully the obscurity of the passage. It contains, says De Wette, 
a Gordian knot still untied. 

V.19. «is "Egeoov. They may have arrived at Ephesus in 
about fourteen days. Cicero and his brother Quintus, on two dif- 
ferent occasions, occupied that length of time in a voyage from 
Ephesus to Athens (ad Attic. Ep. 6. 8.9; Ib. 3. 9). —adrds 8¢, but 
he himself. 'This emphasis brings forward Paul again as the promi- 
nent person, after the information that his companions stayed at 
Ephesus. It is improbable that Luke means that the apostle went 
into the synagogue, but that they did not. 

V. 21. ri éopriv ri épxouerny, the coming feast. One of the 
principal feasts, as the Passover or Pentecost, must be intended 
here. Hence the apostle made this journey in the spring of the 
year. — For soijoa, comp. mad 1d maéoxa in Matt. 26, 18. — eis 
‘Ieporodvupa, at Jerusalem; see on 8, 40.— Some critics reject all’ 
in this verse from dei to ‘IepoodAvpa (Bng., Grsb., Kuin., Neand.). 
But the words have more for them than against them (Tschdf., Mey., 
Olsh., De Wet.). The omission of them probably arose, says 
Meyer, from not perceiving the reference of dvaBds in v. 22, and 
consequently any occasion for such haste in prosecuting the journey. 
—nddw,x.t.d. The apostle soon fulfilled that promise (19, 1). 

V. 22. xarehOav, having come down from the sea to the land; 
comp. 27, 5. — Caesarea was the most convenient seaport in the vi- 
cinity of Judea; see further on 8, 40.— dvaBds, having gone up,i.e. 
to Jerusalem (Caly., Neand., Olsh., Mey., De Wet., Wiesl.). This 
absolute use of the verb occasions no’ obscurity after the statement 
respecting Paul’s destination in v. 21. A few have understood it of 
going up into the city above the harbor. But to mention that cir- 
cumstance in addition to the arrival would give to it a singular 
prominence as contrasted with the general rapidity of the narrative. 
karéBy, at the close of the verse, would be inappropriate to the 
geographical relation of Caesarea to Antioch (Neand.).— rj é- 
kAnotay, the church at Jerusalem. It should be noticed that this is 


262 NOTES. [CHAP. XVIII, 22-24, 


the fourth journey which Paul has made to that city since his con- 
version. — eis ’Avtioyecay. How long the apostle was absent on the 
tour which terminated with this return to Antioch, can only be con- 
jectured. ‘The residence at Corinth (v. 11) would be likely to con- 
stitute the greater portion of the period. Wieseler proposes six 
months as the time occupied between leaving Antioch and the ar- 
rival at Troas (16, 8). He would allow six months also for the 
apostle’s labors in Europe before his arrival at Corinth. The time 
which this calculation allots to the visitation of the Syrian churches 
(15, 41), to the planting of the Galatian churches (see on v. 6), and 
to the indirect and extensive journey which Paul made from Antioch 
to Troas, is too limited; a year, at least, would be a safer esti- 
mate. According to this view, the apostle was absent at this time 
about three years; and if we place his departure early in A. D. 
51, he reached Antioch again in the spring or summer of 54. 
Anger, Wieseler, Meyer, Winer, and others, agree in supposing 
Paul to have arrived at Corinth in the autumn of 52. The admis- 
sion of that date fixes the main point in this part of the chro- 
nology. 


V. 23. Departure of Paul on his Third Missionary Tour. 


xpovov twd. ‘The time now spent at Antioch was apparently 
short. It was during this time, as most critics suppose, that Peter 
arrived here, and the scene took place between him and Paul 
of which we have an account in Gal. 2, 11 sq.; see on 15, 35. 
Neander agrees with those who insert the occurrence here. We 
may assume that the apostle went forth again to the heathen 
about the beginning of the year A. D. 5D. — xabefjs, in successive 
order. ‘This refers, probably, not to the countries named, but to the 
different places in them where churches existed. In accordance 
with the representation on Kiepert’s map, we may suppose that 
Paul went first to Tarsus, thence in a northwestern direction through 
Galatia, and then, turning to the southwest, passed through Phrygia, 
and soon to Ephesus. ‘That course accounts for Luke’s naming 
Galatia before Phrygia, instead of the order in 16, 6. 


V. 24-28. Apollos comes to Ephesus, and is more fully in- 
structed in the Gospel. 


°V. 24. AsodAds = ’Aro\Admos. Asa native of Alexandria, he 
had received probably, says Neander, “ the Jewish-Grecian edu- 


CHAP. XVIII. 24—26.] NOTES. 263 


cation, peculiar to the learned among the Jews of that city, and 
had acquired also great facility in the use of the Greek language.” 
—édyos, eloquent (Olsh., De Wet., Mey.), or learned (Neand.). 
The first sense is the best, because dvvaris év rais ypadpais ascribes 
to him then a different talent, and because his superior faculty as a 
speaker appears to have been the reason why some of the Corinthi- 
ans preferred him to Paul; see 1 Cor. 1, 12; 2,4; 2 Cor. 10, 10. 
— €év rais ypadais, in the Scriptures ; he was familiar with them, and 
could use them with power as a source of argument and appeal. 
This clause points out the sphere of his eloquence. 

V. 25. odros jv, x. 7. d., This one was instructed in the way of 
the Lord, probably by some disciple of John, who had left Judea be- 
fore the Saviour commenced his public course ; or possibly by John 
himself, whose earlier ministry Apollos may have attended. It ap- 
pears from the last clause of the verse, that he was still ignorant 
that Jesus was the Messiah. That was the main defect in his 
knowledge. For the construction of éd0v, see W. § 32. 5; K. 
§ 281. 2. — Kav 76 mvedpart, being fervent in spirit, zealous in his 
disposition. It is less correct to understand mvevpart of the Holy 
Spirit, since that gift appears in the New Testament as the proper 
fruit and seal of the christian faith, which Apollos had not yet 
adopted ; see Gal. 3,2. For other places where mvedya refers to the 
mind, comp. 19, 21; Rom. 12, 11; 2 Cor. 2, 12.— dkpiBds, accu- 
rately (v. 26), i.e. his doctrine was correct as far as his knowledge 
extended. — émordpevos, x. t. X., knowing only the baptism of John, 
which differed from that of the apostles mainly in these respects ; 
first, that theirs recognized a Messiah who had come, and, secondly, 
that it was attested by the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit (19, 6). 
Since John, however, taught that the Saviour was about to appear, 
and that repentance, faith in him, and holiness were necessary to ~ 
salvation, Apollos, though acquainted only with his teaching, could 
be said with entire.truth to be instructed in the way of the Lord. 
It is not affirmed that he had submitted to John’s baptism, but we 
suppose that from the nature of the case. That he was rebaptized, 
Luke does not assert; though, if we regard his moral position as 
analogous to that of the Johannean disciples mentioned in the next 
chapter, we should infer from what is related there that such was 
the fact. Meyer considers the cases dissimilar, and denies that 
Apollos was rebaptized. 

V. 26. #p§aro, began, but did not preach long with such imper- 


~ 


264 | NOTES. [CHAP, XVIII. 296— XIX. 1. 


fect views. As soon as Aquila and Priscilla heard him, they pro- 
ceeded to instruct him more fully. — wappnowfecba means to speak 
boldly. He exposed their sins, required them to repent, and be 
prepared for the kingdom of the Messiah ; comp. Matt. 3, 2 sq. — 
axpiBeorepov, more accurately. 
~~ -V.27. els rv’ Ayxaiav, unto Achaia, of which Corinth was the capi- 
tal,see on v. 1. It was that city which he proposed to visit; comp. 
19,1; 1 Cor. 1,12; 3,4. — mporpewapevor éypawpav, they wrote and ex- 
horted. The participle contains the principal idea; see 1,24. Some 
supply avrov after mporpeWdpevor (Caly., Kuin.); but that assigns to 
the verb and participle different objects, and confuses the sentence. 
Besides, Apollos was not averse to the journey, and had no need of 
exhortation. In 2 Cor. 3, 1, Paul alludes to this letter of commen- 
dation; or to a practice of granting such letters, exemplified in 
this case of Apollos. — ovveBadero, x. t. A., contributed much to 
those who have believed and who still believe. See W. § 41. 4. a. 
It is not meant that he confirmed them in their faith as Christians, 
but codperated with them in their promulgation and defence of the 
truth. ‘The next verse explains the remark. — dia rjs xdprros be- 
longs to the participle (De Wet.), not to the verb (Mey.).. The 
natural sense is that which results from the order of the words. 
For the doctrine, see 3, 16. 

V. 28. evroves, powerfully. — civar tiv Xpioriv "Incodv, that the 
Messiah was Jesus, none other than he ; comp.v. 5. 





CHAPTER XIX. 


V. 1-7. Paul comes to Ephesus, and rebaptizes ceriain Disci- 
ples of John. 


V.1. ev 7d roy "AmoAA® civaa ev Kopivdo, while Apollos was at 
Corinth. This notice apprises us that Paul did not arrive at 
Ephesus till after the departure of Apollos. ’*AmoAd@ (the regular 
genitive ; see 1 Cor. 3,4) here rejects vin the accusative ; comp. 21, 
1 K.§ 48. R.1; W. § 8. 2.— ra dvorepixad pépn, the upper parts 
in the interior as compared with the coast. It may refer to Gala- 
tia and Phrygia, or more definitely to the. regions of Hierapolis, 
Philadelphia, and Sardis, through which Paul would naturally pass on 


Re oe ed ee ey ene anne 


a Oe Oe ee Te” 


CHAP, XIX. 1-4. ] NOTES. 265 


such a journey (Bottg., De Wet.).— wads padnras, certain disci- 
ples. Luke recognizes them in that character (comp. morevoavtes 
in v. 2), because, though their knowledge was so imperfect, they 
were sincere ; they possessed the elements of a true faith, and ac- 
knowledged the name of Christ as soon as the apostle made it 
known to them. It is probable that they were strangers who had 
just arrived at Ephesus, and when the apostle found them had not 
yet come in contact with any of the Christians there. 

V. 2. For «i in a direct question, see on 1,6; The inquiry 
appears abrupt, because we have so broken an account of the 
circumstances of the case. Undoubtedly something preceded, 
which led the apostle to suspect that the men entertained inadequate 
or mistaken views of the gospel. — wvedua dyov means here the 
Holy Spirit in his miraculous communications, as is made evident 
by v. 6. That, too, is the prevailing sense in which Luke em- 
ploys the expression in the Acts. —dAN ovde, x. 7. A., follows a sup- 
pressed negative: No—but (i. e. on the contrary) we have not 
heard (De Wet.) ; comp. 1 Cor. 10,20. See W. § 57. 4.— aveipa 
dyiov must have the meaning in their reply which it has in Paul’s 
question. Hence it is unnecessary and incorrect to supply So6év or 
éxxuvduevor after gore ; comp. John 7, 39. 

V.3. is ti, sc. Bdariopa, x. tr. A., Unto what, i. e. baptism, there- 
fore, were ye baptized ? — cis r5 "Iwdvvov Barricpa should have the 
sense here which it has in other passages (comp. 1,22 ; 10,37; Matt. 
3,7; Luke 7, 29, etc.), viz. the baptism which John administered, 
or such as he administered. It may not be safe to infer that they 
received the rite from John himself. Their answer was not, there- 
fore, that they had been baptized unto John as the Messiah ; and 

, the idea that their error was that of adhering to him as the Messiah 
has no support from this expression. That some, however, at a 
very early period, entertained that opinion of John, is a fact well 
established. The .Zabians, or Nazoreeans, or Mendzans, as they 
are variously called, who were discovered in the East about the 
middle-of the seventeenth century, are supposed to be a remnant 
of that sect, See Neand. Ch. Hist. Vol. I. p. 376. 

V. 4. The reply of Paul is apparently this: ‘‘ John indeed 
preached repentance and a Saviour to come (as you know) ; but the 
Messiah whom he announced has appeared in Jesus, and you are 
now to believe on him as John directed.” — pév, which some editors 
omit after “Iedwns, is genuine (Mey., Tschdf., De Wet.). — roor 

34 





266 NOTES. [cHAP. xXIx, 4-9. 


éorw presents the adversative idea, instead of the ordinary 8. See 
W.§ 64.11. 2.e; K. § 322, R. 4. — éBamrie governs Bamriopa, on 
the principle of affinity in point of sense; comp. Luke 7, 29. 
W. § 32.2; K. § 278. 1.— Xpiordv is common before “Ingots, but 
is unwarranted here. 

V. 5. dkovoavres, x. t. ., Now they (whom Paul addressed) 
having heard were baptized. ‘Their prompt reception of the truth 
would tend to show that the defect in their former baptism related 
not so much to any positive error, as to their ignorance in regard to 
the proper object of faith, Some of the older writers maintained 
that Luke records these words as a continuation of Paul’s remarks : 
Now they (whom John addressed) having heard were baptized. 
The object was to rescue the passage from those who appealed to 
it, in order to justify rebaptism. This opinion misstates the fact in 
regard to John’s baptism ; he did not administer it in the name of 
Jesus. No one, at present, contends for that interpretation. 

V. 6. Compare this verse with 10, 44-—46.— For spoepjrevor, 
see on 2, 17. 

V.'7. of wdvres dy8pes, all the men together. sas in this adver- 
bial sense (= 1d way, ra mavra) occurs especially in connection with 
numerals. Compare 27, 35. It is rare to find the adjective with 
this force before the substantive. See K. A. Gr. § 489. 8; Vig. 
ed. Herm. p. 185. 


V. 8-12. Paul preaches at Ephesus, and confirms the Word by 
Miracles. 


V. 8. qeidav, sc. abrods (28, 23), seeking to persuade them of 
the things, etc. ; see on 13,43. The first accusative specifies the 
aim of the act. K. § 279. 4. 

V.9. wes, some, i.e. of the Jews, as results from ovvaywyny in 
v. 8. — ri d8dy, the way, i. e. of Christian belief and practice ; not 
concretely, sect, party ; comp. v. 23; 9, 2.— évdmiov rod mAnOovs, 
in the presence of the multitude. ‘This attempt to prevent others 
from believing showed how hardened they were, more fully than 
their own rejection of the gospel. — dpapice robs pabnrds, separated 
the disciples, i.e. from the Jews in the synagogue. — ev rH cxody, 
in the school, viz. the place where he taught. This Tyrannus, 
otherwise unknown, was probably a teacher of philosophy or rhet- 
oric, who occupied the apartment at other hours. Whether he 
granted it to the Christians as a favor, or received compensation for 
the use of it, is uncertain. 


“Stes 


ee ae 


eS EO Oe LE ee ae 





CHAP. XIX. 10—12.] NOTES. 267 


V.10. éi én dv0. These two years are exclusive of the three 
months mentioned in v. 8; for rovro opposes expresslyethe preach- 
ing in the school of ‘Tyrannus to that in the synagogue. It is 
probable that they are exclusive also of the time occupied by the 
events which took place after v. 21; for in 20, 31 Paul reminds the 
Ephesians that he had labored three years among them; so that 
nine months, or six months at least (if we regard rpieriay there as a 
general expression), must be added to the two years and three 
months mentioned here. The retrospective remark in v. 20 would 
be a very natural one for the writer to make on the completion of 
a distinct period. — It was during this abode of Paul at Ephesus, and 
probably not long after his arrival there, that he wrote the Epistle 
to the Galatians.* — dare .... ’Aciav, so that all who inhabited 
Asia, viz. the Roman province of that name (2,9). Ephesus was 
the capital of this province, the centre of commerce and religious 
worship (v. 26), to which the people resorted from all parts of the 
country. Hence the apostle had an opportunity to preach to a vast 
number, in addition to those who resided in the city ; and at the same 
time, through the agency of those converted by him, he could have 
introduced the gospel into regions which he did not visit in person. 
It was but forty years after this that Pliny, in his celebrated letter to 
Trajan, says, even in reference to the more distant Bithynia: 
‘*¢ Multi omnis etatis, omnis ordinis, utriusque sexUs etiam, vocantur 
in periculum et vocabuntur. Neque enim civitates tantum, sed vicos 
etiam atque agros superstitionis istius contagio pervagata est.” 

V.11. od rds trvyovcas, not casual, i. e. uncommon, extraordi- 
nary ; comp. 28, 2. It was the performance of the miracles with- 
_out the personal agency or presence of the apostle (v. 12) that 
made them so remarkable. They were not generically different 
from those wrought on other occasions. 

V. 12. ai, also, i. e. among other miracles. (Mey.). — émépe- 
cOa, x. Tt. r., were carried from his body, to which the articles had 
been touched for the purpose of receiving the healing power that 
was supposed to reside in him; see Luke 8, 46. — covddapia, hand- 
kerchiefs, lit. sweat-cloths. They had their name from the use to 
which they were principally applied. — cipuxivOia, aprons, such as 
artisans and servants wore when engaged about their work. It isa 
Latin word (semicinctia) which had passed into the Greek; see on 





* See Appendix, No. 6. 


268 NOTES. [CHAP XIX. 12-16. 


11, 26.—It is evident from ras vooovs and ra svedpara that the 
writer made a distinction \between ordinary diseases and those in- 
 flicted by evil spirits (comp. on 5, 16; 8, 7). 


V. 13-17. The Defeat of certain Jewish Exorcists. 


V. 18. The common text has rivés ard tév, x. tr. X. The more 
approved reading is rwés kat trav, x. r. dX. (Grsb., Tschdf., Mey.). 
kai joins rwes with Paul, with reference to the act in dvouagew: they 
also attempted to call, as he called. — meprepyopévov, not opprobri- 
ously, vagabond, but wandering from place to place im the practice 
of their arts. — éfopxordv, exorcists ; that was their professed, re- 
puted occupation. They appear to have regarded Paul as one of 
their own class, but of a higher order. They supposed that he had 
obtained a name more potent than any employed by them, and that 
by means of it he could perform in reality the wonders to which 
they merely pretended. — dpkifw ipas tov “Incodv, I adjure you 
by the Jesus. For the double accusative, compare Mark 5, 7; 
1 Thess. 5,27. See W. § 32. 4; C. § 428. 

V. 14. For the Doric Sxeva, see on 11, 30. — dpyyepews, a chief- 
priest, a priest of the higher class; see on 4, 6. — émrd, seven. 
The numeral is too remote from tives to be indefinite, about seven ; 
see on 23, 23. 

V. 15. 1d mveipa, the spirit, viz. the one whom they were at- 
tempting to exorcise on a certain occasion. — roy "Inooty ywooka, 
Jesus I know, i. e. his authority and power ; ériorapac, I know fully, 
stronger than the other verb, and applied to Paul in opposition to 
them, i. e. they are utterly unknown. — tyeis precedes rives, be- 
cause it takes the emphasis. 

V. 16. Kat épadddpevos, x. tr. X., and the man (impelled by the 
evil spirit) leaping upon them, — xaraxuptevoas, k. T.r., having over- 
powered them, was strong, showed himself such against them, viz. 
by tearing off their garments and beating them. — yuprovs, naked, 
need not be taken in its strict sense. It could be applied to those 
stripped partially of their raiment; comp. John 21, 7.— ex rod 
oixov éxeivov, from out of that house where the transaction took 
place. The pronoun reveals a more definite scene in the writer’s 
view than he has described. — In the occurrence related here, we 
are to recognize a special design on the part of God. It was im- 
portant, says Neander, that the divine power which accompanied 
the gospel should, in some striking manner, exhibit its superiority 


CHAP. XIX. 16—21.] NOTES. 269 


to the magic which prevailed so extensively at Ephesus, and which, 
by its apparently great effects, deceived and captivated so many. 
It would have a tendency to rescue men from those arts of impos- 
ture, and prepare their minds for the reception of the truth. 


V. 18-20. Many are converted, and confess their Sins. 


V. 18. oddXoi re, x. tr... And many of those who believed in 
consequence of the event just related. Those intended here are 
a different class from those spoken of in the next verse ; hence, not 
the jugglers themselves, but their dupes, those who had confided 
in them and been accessory to the wicked delusion. — ras mpdéeus 
abrav, their deeds, superstitious practices (Olsh., Mey., De Wet.) ; 
some understand it of their sins in general (Kuin.). It is better in 
this connection to restrict the meaning. 

V.19. ixavoi,x. 7. r., And many of those who practised magic 
arts, lit. things over-wrought, curious, recondite. — rds BiBdovs, the 
books which contained their mysteries, i. e. magical signs, formulas 
of incantation, nostrums, and the like. — kal edpov, x. r.A., and they 
found as the sum fifty thousand (sc. Spaxyds) of silver money. It 
was common in such designations to omit the name of the coin. 
See Bernh. Syntax, p. 187. The Attic drachm passed at this time 
among the Jews and Romans for a denarius, and was worth about 
fifteen cents ; so that the books amounted to $7,500. Some sup- 
ply shekel as the elliptical word; which, reckoning that coin at 
sixty cents, would make the amount four times as great. But as 
the occurrence took place in a Greek city, and as Luke was not 
writing for Jews, it is entirely improbable that he has stated the 
sum in their currency. | 

V. 20. ni€ave kal icxver, grew and was strong, mighty. The 
first verb refers to the general extension of the gospel, the second 
to its influence on the conduct of those who embraced it. What 
precedes illustrated the remark in both respects. — This verse pre- _ 
sents a striking coincidence as compared with 1 Cor. 16,9. It was 
here at. _ Ephesus, and about this time, that Paul wrote the Second 
Epistle to the Corinthians.* 


V. 21, 22. The Apostle proposes to leave Ephesus. 


V.21. ero év 7G mveiparr, decided, formed the purpose; see 





* See Appendix, No. 6. 


270 NOTES. [CHAP. XIX. 21, 22 


on 5, 4. — Macedonia and Achaia occur here also in the Roman 
sense. ‘The order of the names indicates that the apostle intended 
at this time to have proceeded directly from Corinth to Jerusalem. 
An unexpected event (see 20, 3) compelled him to change his 
plan. — det. ... ideiv, it is necessary that I should see also Rome ; 
not in order to fulfil any revealed purpose of God, but to satisfy 
his own feelings. He was anxious to visit the believers there, and 
to preach the gospel in that metropolis of the world; see Rom. 1, 
11. 14. — Paley institutes a striking comparison between this verse 
and Rom. 1, 13 and 15, 23-28. “The conformity between the 
history and the Epistle is perfect. In the first passage of the Epis- 
tle, we find that a design of visiting Rome had long dwelt in the 
apostle’s mind; here, in the Acts, we find that design expressed a 
considerable time before the Epistle was written. In the history 
we find that the plan which Paul had formed was to pass through 
Macedonia and Achaia; after that, to go to Jerusalem ; and when 
he had finished his visit there, to sail for Rome. When the Epistle 
was written, he had executed so much of his plan, as to have passed 
through Macedonia and Achaia ; and was preparing to pursue the 
remainder of it, by speedily setting out towards Jerusalem; and in 
’ this point of his travels he tells his friends at Rome, that, when he 
had completed the business which carried him to Jerusalem, he 
would come to them, when he should make his journey into Spain.” 
Nor is the argument to be evaded by supposing the passages to 
have been adjusted to each other in this manner. “If the passage 
in the Epistle was taken from that in the Acts, why was Spain put 
in? If the passage in the Acts was taken from that in the Epistle, 
why was Spain left out? If the two passages were unknown to 
each other, nothing can account for their conformity but truth.” 

V. 22. The last notice of Timothy was in 18,5. Compare on 
18, 18. But what connection is there between the apostle’s send- 
ing Timothy into Macedonia and his own purpose to proceed to 
Achaia? We obtain an answer to that question from 1 Cor. 4, 
17-19. We learn there that Timothy was not to stop in Mace- 
donia, but to pass on to Corinth, the capital city of Achaia, and 
prepare the church for the approaching visit of the apostle. ‘Thus 
‘“‘the narrative agrees with the Epistle ; and the agreement is at- 
tended with very little appearance of design. One thing at least 
concerning it is certain; that if this passage of Paul’s history had 
been taken from his letter, it would have sent Timothy to Corinth 


A oe ee 
ee ee en eee! 


CHAP. XIX. 22—26.] NOTES. 271 


by name, or at all events into Achaia.” — Erastus may be the per- 
son of that name in 2 Tim. 4, 20, but the best critics distinguish 
him from the one mentioned in Rom. 16, 23 (Neand., De Wet., 
Win.). The office of the latter as “ treasurer of the city’? would 
have demanded his more constant presence at Corinth. 


V. 23-27. Demetrius excites a Tumult at Ephesus. 


V. 23. Kara rov xaipdv éxcivov, about that time, viz. that of Paul’s 
intended departure. — epi rijs 6d00, concerning the way; see the 
Note on 9, 2. 

V. 24. dp explains “a a tumult arose. — vaobs dpyupois ’Apré- 
pidos, silver shrines of Artemis. ‘These were small portable ima- 
ges, resembling the temple at Ephesus, and containing a figure of 
the goddess. ‘The manufacture of these shrines was a lucrative 
business, as they were in great request; they were set up in houses 
as objects of worship, or carried about the person as having the 
supposed power to avert diseases and other dangers. They were 
not only sold here in Asia, but sent as an article of traffic to distant 
countries. Demetrius, it would seem, was a wholesale dealer in 
such shrines ; he executed orders for them, and employed rexviras, 
artisans, who performed the more delicate processes, and also 
épydras (v. 25), laborers, who did the rougher work. So Kuinoel, 
Hemsen, and De Wette distinguish the foregoing nouns from each 
other. See on the next verse. — Compare magetxere with the active 
form in 16, 16. . 

V. 25. kai may add rods épydras to os as a supplementary term : 
and (in addition to those in his own service) the workmen in general 
occupied in the same way. Meyer proposes this explanation. I 
prefer it to the other, for it is improbable that Demetrius would con- 
fine his appeal to his own men, and it is doubtful whether the dif- 
ference between rexvira: and épydéra: can turn on the quality of the 
work. —roatra preceded by rd limits the reference to vaovs, i. e., 
definitely, such things as those; comp. Matt. 19, 14; 2 Cor. 12, 
2.3. \W.§ 17.11; K.§ 246.4. It is incorrect to extend the pro- 
noun so as to include statuary, pictures, coins, and the like (Blmf.). 
— énioracbe, ye know well ; see v. 15.—rairns refers to mov vaots 
in Luke’s narrative. It stands, therefore, for some equivalent 
term or idea in the speech of Demetrius. — evropia, prosperity, 
wealth. 

V. 26. Edécou, of or from (not at) Ephesus, depends on éxdov 


272 NOTES. [ CHAP. XIX. 26, 27. 


as a genitive of possession. —’Agias has, no doubt, its Roman 
sense, The effect ascribed here to Paul’s labors agrees with the 
statement in vy. 10. This genitive is governed like the other. — 
pereotnoev, has turned aside, i. e. from our mode of worship. — 
Ort ovK, kK. tT. A., that they are not gods which are made by hands. 
The mode of speaking illustrates the disposition of the heathen to 
identify their gods with the idols or temples consecrated to them ; 
see on 17, 24. 

V.27. rodro ro pépos, this part, branch of our labor (Kyp., 
Mey.). The idea is (“si ad vivum rem resecare velis,” says 
Kypke) that their art as silversmiths, to whatever other uses it 
might be applied, was about to be ruined as to this particular appli- 
cation of it. — piv, for us (dat. incomm.), to our detriment. — eis 
dredeypov €dOeiv, to come into contempt (Mey.) ; in redargutionem 
venire (Vulg.), i. e. to be confuted, rejected (De Wet.). The noun 
occurs only here, and its meaning must be inferred from its relation 
to cognate words. A result of confutation is shame, loss of char- 
acter, and hence the expression could be used to signify that they 
feared lest their business should lose its credit in the public esti- 
mation. — peydAns (see also v. 28), as is attested by ancient writers, 
was applied to the Ephesian Diana in a special sense. — iepoy sc. 
xuduvever, Which we repeat from the other clause, and which governs 
the following doy Ojvat. — pédrew, x. 7. d., and also that her glory 
will be destroyed, etc. The discourse here changes from the direct — 
to the indirect, as if éy or etme had introduced this part of the sen- 
tence. We have a similar transition in 23, 24. See W. § 64. 
Ill. 2. re (needlessly exchanged by some for 8) joins the clause 
with what precedes, while cui adds another argument to enforce the 
speaker’s object. —7 oixoupern, the world ; comp. on 11,28. The 
temple at Ephesus had been built at the common expense of all 
Greece. Pilgrims repaired thither from all nations and countries. 
— The speech of Demetrius deserves attention for its artful char- 
acter. He takes care, in the first place, to show his fellow-crafts- 
men how the matter affected their own personal interests, and then, 
having aroused their selfishness, he proceeds to appeal with so 
much the more effect to their zeal for religion. His main reliance, 
as Calvin thinks, was upon the first: ‘*Res ipsa clamat non tam 
pro aris ipsos quam pro focis pugnare, ut scilicet culinam habeant 
bene calentem.” 


CHAP. XIX. 28— 30.] NOTES. 273 


V. 28-34, The Mob seize two of Paul’s Companions and rush to 
the Theatre. 


V. 28. 4upod, of wrath against Paul and the Christians. — expagor. 
The scene is now transferred to the street. Perhaps the rioters 
traversed the city for a time with their outcry, before they executed 
the movement spoken of in the next verse. 

V. 29. Kat errnoOn, x. r. d., And the whole vite: was filled with 
tumult, or the tumult if we me trys. The evidence for the article 
is not decisive. — Spunoay, x. r.d., And they rushed with one accord 
into the theatre. The subject of the verb here includes those who 
excited the disturbance and those who joined in it. ‘They rushed 
to the theatre because it was the custom of the Greeks, though not 
of the Romans, to use their theatres for public business as well as 
for sports. See on 12,21. ‘The multitude had evidently no defi- 
nite plan of action, and no definite idea of the cause of the present 
excitement; see v. 32. All they knew was, that some danger 
threatened their religion, and under that impression they hastened 
to the usual place of concourse for further inquiry, or for consulta- 
tion. The remains of the theatre at Ephesus are still visible. It is 
described as ‘*a wreck of immense grandeur.” It was built on 
the side of a lofty hill, with the seats rising in long succession one 
above another, and, like similar edifices among the ancients, was 
entirely open to the sky. A recent traveller judges that it was 
large enough te contain thirty thousand persons. ‘The temple of 
Diana could be seen from it, at no great distance, across the market- 
place. Luke has violated no probability, therefore, in represent- 

‘ing so many people as assembled in such a place. — ovvapracavres 

may denote an act antecedent to that of the verb, or one simultane- 
ous with it: after they had seized, or seizing, the men along with 
themselves. See W. § 46. 12,R.1. Meyer prefers the first mode, 
De Wette the second. For a different explanation of civ in the 
participle, see Rob. Lex. s. v. — Gaius, or Caius, who was a Mace- 
donian, is not the one in 20, 4, or in Rom. 16, 23; 1 Cor. 1, 15; 
for the former belonged to Derbe, the latter to Corinth. — Aris- 
tarchus was a Thessalonian (20, 4) ; see further, on 27, 2. 

V. 30. TatAov. He may have been absent from his abode at 
the time of the assault. — eis rév dior, unto the people in the thea- 
tre (v. 31). His idea may have been, that his appearance there in 
person, or a declaration that he was willing to have ‘his conduct ex- 

35 


274 NOTES. [CHAP. XIX. 30— 33. 


amined, would allay the tumult; comp. v. 37. His anxiety must 
have been the greater from his not knowing to what danger the 
friends who had fallen into the hands of the mob might be exposed. 
— oi pabnrat, the disciples, who were, no doubt, native Ephesians. 
They understood their countrymen too well to encourage the apos- 
tle’s inclination. | 

V. 31. rév’Actapyév. The Asiarchs were ten men, chosen 
annually from the chief towns in proconsular Asia, to superintend 
the games and festivals held every year in honor of the gods and 
the Roman emperor. They were chosen from the wealthier class 
of citizens, since, like the Roman ediles, they were required to 
provide for these exhibitions at their own expense. Those who 
had filled the office once retained the title for the rest of life. One 
of the number acted as chief Asiarch, who resided commonly at 
Ephesus. The Bithyniarchs, Galatarchs, Syriarchs, were a similar 
class of magistrates in other provinces of Western Asia. — Aker- 
man offers here the following just remark: ‘* That the very main- 
tainers and presidents of the heathen sports and festivals of a peo- 
ple to whom the doctrine of Christ and the resurrection was fool- 
ishness were the friends of Paul, was an assertion which no fabrica- 
tor of a forgery would have ventured upon. We cannot penetrate 
the veil which antiquity has thrown over these events, and are only 
left to conjecture, either that Christianity itself had supporters, 
though secret ones who feared the multitude, in these wealthy Asi- 
atics ; or that, careless of the truth of what the apostle preached, 
they admired his eloquence, and wished to protect one whom they 
considered so highly gifted.” 

V. 32. odv, now, resumptive as in 9, 31; 8,4. It puts forward 
the narrative from the point reached in v. 29. The two preceding 
verses relate to a collateral circumstance. 

V. 33. ék 8€ rod bxAov, kK. tT. A., Now out of the crowd, from their 
midst, they, viz. the Jews, urged forward Alexander. ‘“ As the Jews 
here lived in the midst of a numerous Greek population who viewed 
them with constant aversion, any special occasion roused their 
slumbering prejudices into open violence, and they had then much 
to suffer. Hence the Jews on this occasion feared that the anger 
of the people against the enemies of their gods — especially as 
many of them did not know who were really intended — would be 
directed against themselves, and they were anxious, therefore, that 
one of their number, a man by the name of Alexander, should 


CHAP. XIX. 33, 34.] NOTES. 275 


stand forward, in order to shift the blame from themselves upon the 
Christians ; but the appearance of such a person who himself. be- 
longed to the enemies of their gods, excited in the heathen still 
greater rage, and the clamor became more violent.” ‘This is the view 
of Neander, and is the one adopted by Kuinoel, Hemsen, Olshausen, 
Winer, and most others. Some, on the contrary, as Calvin, Meyer, 
Wieseler, understand that Alexander was a Jewish Christian, and 
that the Jews, who recognized him as such, pushed him forward in 
order to expose him to the fury of the populace. dzodoyeicba has 
been said to favor this opinion; but it may refer to a defence in 
behalf of the Jews as well as of the Christians. The Alexander 
in 2 Tim. 4, 14 could hardly have been the same person ; 6 yad- 
xevs may have been added there to distinguish him from this indi- 
vidual. — mpoBaddAdvrav airdv trav “Iovdaiov. The subject of this 
subordinate clause is the same as that of the principal clause which 
precedes ; whereas, according to the ordinary rule, it is only when 
the subjects are different that the genitive absolute is employed. 
mpoBaddéovrav would have been regularly in the nominative. Ex- 
ceptions like this occur in the classics. ‘The idea of the secondary 
clause acquires in this way more prominence. See K. § 313, R. 2, 
as compared with § 312. 3. 

V. 34. énvyvorres is nominative, as if épovncay aravres had fol- 
lowed, instead of gdovy .... &« mavrav. See W. § 64. Il. 1. The 
expression with that change would have been more correct, but less 
forcible. — as él pas, x. tr. X. Their unintermitted cry for about 
two hours, ‘* Great is Diana of the Ephesians !” not only declared 
their attachment to her worship, but, according to the ideas of the 
heathen, was itself an act of worship ; comp. 1 Kings 18,26 ; Matt. 
6,7. The Mohammedan monks in India at the present time often 
practise such repetitions for entire days together. They have been 
known to say over a single syllable, which they regard as holy, un- 
til their strength is gone and they are unable to speak any longer.* 
— It has been remarked that the reverberation of their voices from 
the steep rock which formed one side of the theatre (see on v. 29) 
must have rendered the many-mouthed, phrensied exclamation still 
more terrific, : 





* See Tholuck’s Auslegung der Bergpredigt (3d ed.), p. 328 sq. 


276 NOTES. [CHAP, XIX. 35 — 38. 


V. 35-40. Speech of the City-Recorder, who quells the Uproar 
and disperses the Multitude. 


V. 35. ypappareds. ‘In the cities of Asia Minor,” says Winer, 
‘as appears from notices and inscriptions, this was the title of the 
heads or chiefs of the municipal government, because it was their 
original and more immediate office to register the public acts and 
laws, or to preserve the record of them.” (Realw. I. p. 649.) As 
magistrates, they took rank, it is said, next to the proconsul. “ That 
the office,” says Akerman, “was a most honorable one, may be 
inferred from a coin of Nysa, in Caria, on which Tiberius Cesar 
is called scribe of that city.” — In tis ydp éorw, ydp refers to a sup- 
pressed thought: You have no occasion for this excitement; for 
what man is there, etc. — 8s ov, x. t. X., who does not know that the 
city of the Ephesians is keeper, guardian, of the great Diana. vew- 
képov, lit. temple-sweeper, was an honorary title granted to certain 
Asiatic cities in recognition of the care and expense bestowed by 
them on the temple and worship of their favorite deities. It is 
found on coins of Ephesus, struck about Paul’s time. For the dif- 
ference between the participle and infinitive as the complement of 
ywoore, see K. § 811. 4. — rod Avorerois, sc. dydkparos, the image 
fallen from Jupiter. ‘There was a similar tradition in regard to a 
statue of Artemis in Tauris (Eurip. Iph. T. 977), and also one of 
Pallas at Athens (Pausan. I. 26. 6). 

V. 36. otro, these things, viz. the established reputation of 
the Ephesians for their attachment to the worship of Diana, and the 
well-known origin of her image. Hence the argument is this: 
They had no reason to fear that such a people could be induced to 
abandon a religion which so wonderful an event had signalized. — 
dSéov éoriv pas, it is necessary that you, i. e. morally, you ought. 

V. 37. ydp confirms the implication in mpomerés, i. e. that they 
had acted rashly. — rovrovs refers to Gaius and Aristarchus; see 
v. 29. Paul was not present. 

V. 38. ody, therefore, since the men are innocent in regard to 
such crimes (Mey.). — ovp avré, with him, i. e. his associates in the 
complaint against Paul (comp. 5, 17). The ypapypareds knew of 
their connection with the case from something which they had done 
or said in the assembly, which Luke has not related. —aydpaior sc. 
nepat ayovra, court-days are kept, observed. ‘The days are so 
called because the courts were held in the forum; comp. 16, 19; 


CHAP. XIX. 388— XX. 1.] NOTES. Q77 


17, 5. It is contended by some, that this adjective should be 
marked as proparoxytone in this sense, but as circumflex when used 
asin 17,5. See W.§ 6.2. The distinction is a doubtful one. — 
kai dvOtzaroi eiow, and there are proconsuls. ‘The plural is generic, 
as but one such officer presided over a province. ‘The coins of 
Ephesus show that the proconsular authority was fully established 
there in the reign of Nero. Akerman gives the engraving of one 
which has the head of that emperor on the obverse ; and on the re- 
verse, a representation of the temple of Diana, with the words: 
(Money) of the Ephesians, Neocori, Aichmocles Aviola, Pro- 
consul. 

V.39. ef dé tt, x. 7. X., But if ye make any demand (stronger 
than the simple verb) concerning other things than those of a pri- 
vate nature. — év rH évvdum éxxAnoia, in the lawful assembly which 
this is not. ‘“ Legitimus ccetus est qui a magistratu civitatis convo- 
catur et regitur.” * (Grot.) 

V. 40. dp justifies the intimation in évvéy@ as to the character 
of the present concourse. — kwéduvevouev. They were in danger of 
being called to account by the proconsul. The Roman govern- 
ment watched every appearance of insubordination or sedition in 
the provinces with a jealous eye. Thousands were often put to 
death in the attempt to suppress such movements. It was a capital 
offence to take any part in a riotous proceeding. ‘The speaker’s 
hint, therefore, was a significant one. — ordcews is governed by 
mepi, not by the verb. — pndevds airiov imdpxovros explains, not why 
they were liable to be arraigned, but how seriously it would termi- 
nate if the affair should take that direction. 





CHAPTER XxX. 


V. 1- 6. Paul proceeds a second Time to Greece, and returns 
from there to Troas. 


V. 1. pera 8€ 7d ravcacba tov OdpvBov, Now after the disturb- 
ance had ceased. ‘This clause shows that Paul left Ephesus soon 
after that occurrence, but furnishes no evidence, says Neander, that 
his departure was hastened by it. We may conclude that Paul 
“ tarried at Ephesus until Pentecost,” pursuant to his intention ex- 


278 NOTES. [CHAP. Xx. 1. 


pressed in 1 Cor. 16,8; and consequently, that he left that city in 
the spring or summer of A. D. 57 or 58. Compare the Note on 
18, 23 with that on 19, 9. — To this period of the history belongs 
probably another event which Luke has not recorded. Paul wrote 
his Second Epistle to the Corinthians in Macedonia, while he was 
on his way to Corinth at the present time.* But in 2 Cor. 12, 14, 
he says: iS0d, rpiroy rovro éroipws Exw éhOciv mpos tyas. ‘The connec- 
tion decides that rpirov belongs to éAdciv. It cannot refer to a third 
intention merely to visit the Corinthians ; for he is saying that, as 
he had “not been burdensome to them” hitherto when he was 
among them, so in-his present visit he would adhere to the same 
policy. Again, in 2 Cor. 13, 1, he says: spirov roiro epyopat. 
Here it is expressly said, that the apostle was now on the point of 
making his third journey to Corinth. ‘These passages oblige us to 
suppose that Paul had been at Corinth twice when he wrote his 
Second Epistle to the church in that city.t So conclude, among 
others, Michaelis, Schrader, Bleek, Liicke, Schott, Anger, Riickert, 
Credner, Neander, Olshausen, Meyer, Wieseler, Osiander. But 
where in Luke’s narrative are we to insert this second journey to 
Corinth? Of the different answers given to this question, I regard 
that as the most satisfactory which places the journey within the 
period of Paul’s residence of three years at Ephesus. It would 
have been easy for him to have crossed over from the one city to 
_ the other at any time ; and, considering the urgent reasons for such 
a visit furnished by the condition of the Corinthian church, one 
would think that he could hardly have refrained from availing him- 
self of the opportunity. As his stay there was probably very brief, 
and unattended by any important event, Luke has made no men- 
tion of it. Schrader, Rickert, Olshausen, Meyer, Wieseler, and 
others, intercalate the journey at this point. Neander suggests that 
Paul, at the commencement of this missionary tour, may have ex- 





* See Appendix, No. 6. 

t The correct interpretation of 2 Cor. 1, 15. 16 presents no obstacle to 
this construction of the passages cited above. The sixteenth of those 
verses explains the fifteenth. The apostle has reference there to a journey 
to Corinth which he had purposed, but had failed to execute ; viz. a jour- 
ney into Macedonia by way of Corinth, and then a return to Corinth from 
Macedonia; a plan which would have secured to the Corinthians ‘a sec- 
ond benefit”? (Sevrépay xdpw) in connection with that tour, i. e. the bene- 
fit of his presence, not once merely, but a second time. 


CHAP. XX. 1—3.] NOTES. 279 


tended his travels before his arrival at Ephesus so far as to have 
included Greece. Anger, Schott, and some others, think that Paul’s 
second visit to Corinth may have been a return to that city from some 
excursion which he made into the neighboring regions during the 
year and a half of his first sojourn at Corinth (18, 1 sq.). — ééA6e, 
x. t. A. The direction which the apostle took we learn from 2 Cor. 
2, 12.13. He proceeded to Troas, where he had expected to meet 
Titus, whom he had sent to Corinth in order to ascertain the effect 
of his First Epistle to the church in that city. It was his intention, 
apparently, to remain and labor for a time at Troas, in case the in- 
formation for which he was looking should be favorable. But not 
finding Titus there, and being unable to endure a longer suspense, 
he embarked at once for Macedonia. On his arrival there he met 
with Titus, and was relieved of his anxiety ; see 2 Cor. 7, 6. 

V. 2. 1a pépn exeiva, those parts, i. e. the region of Macedonia. 
—mapaxadéoas atrois, having exhorted them, i. e. the believers. 
The expression shows that he now revisited the places where he 
had preached on his first visit here, viz. Philippi, Thessalonica, 
Berea. In Rom. 15, 19, Paul speaks of having published the gos- 
pel as far as to Illyricum, which was a country on the west of Mace- 
donia. It was at this time, probably, that he penetrated so far in that 
direction. It could not have been on his first visit to Macedonia 


, (16, 12 sq.) ; for the course of his journey at that time is minutely 


traced in the Acts from his landing at Philippi to his leaving Cor- 
inth. He moved along the eastern side of the peninsula, and was 
kept at a distance from Illyricum. When he passed through Mace- 
donia next (v. 3), he had already written the Epistle to the Ro- 


‘mans. Lardner pronounces this geographical coincidence sufficient- 


ly important to confirm the entire history of Paul’s travels. — eis rip 
‘EdAdda, unto Greece, which stands here for ’Axaia, as opposed to 
Macedonia. Wetstein has shown that Luke was justified in that 
use of the term. -Paul was proceeding to Corinth, the capital of 
the province ; comp. Rom. 16, 1. | 

V. 3.  womoas is anacoluthic for romoavrs; see 19, 34. — As 
Paul left Philippi after the Passover (see v. 6), the three antecedent 
months which he spent at Corinth must have been the winter 
months. It was near the expiration of this period that Paul wrote 
the Epistle to the Romans.* — péddovrt, x. r. X., as he was about to 








* See Appendix, No. 6. 


280 NOTES. [cHAP. xx. 3-5, 


embark for Syria, i. e. directly from Corinth; his ultimate destina- 
tion was Jerusalem. — éyevero, x. r. ., ¢ was thought advisable that 
he should return through Macedonia. Uow his taking this course 
would enable him to escape the machinations of the Jews is not 
perfectly clear. The opinion that he was waiting to have the navi- 
gation of the season reopen, but was compelled to hasten his de- 
parture before that time, is certainly incorrect; for it is said he was 
on the point of embarking when the conspiracy of the Jews com- 
pelled him to leave. It is possible that the Jews intended to assault 
him on his way to the ship, or else to follow and capture him after 
having put to sea. Hemsen’s conjecture is, that, although the sea- 
son was sufficiently advanced to allow him to go by sea, he had 
not yet found a vessel proceeding to Syria, and that his exposure at 
Corinth rendered it unsafe for him to remain and wait for such an 
opportunity. 

V. 4. ouveirero airé, followed him, i. e. as companions, formed 
his party. The verb belongs to all the names which follow, but 
agrees with the nearest. — The best manuscripts read Ilvppov, sc. 
vids; genitive of kindredship (see on 1,18). This addition distin- 
guishes Sopater perhaps from Sosipater in Rom. 16, 21, since 
they are but different forms of the same name (Win.).— Occca- 
Aovkéwy is a partitive genitive. — Aristarchus was mentioned in 19, 
29; but the Gaius there must be a different person from this one, 
since they belonged to different countries. Some (Kuin., Olsh., 
Neand.) would change the punctuation, so as to join AepBaios with 
Tiyddeos, and add Gaius to the Thessalonians. But that division 
not only puts «ai out of its natural place, but disagrees with 16, 1, 
where Timothy appears as a native of Lystra. — Secundus is other- 
wise unknown. — Luke supposes Timothy’s origin to be familiar to 
the reader, and so passes it over (De Wet., Mey.). — Tychicus is 
named in Eph. 6, 21; Col. 4,7; Tit. 3,12, and 2 Tim, 4, 12. 
He was one of the most trusted of Paul’s associates. — Trophimus, 
who was an Ephesian, appears again in 21, 29, and 2 Tim. 4, 20. 
He and probably Aristarchus (27, 2) went with the apostle to Jeru- 
salem. Hence éxp: ris ’Acias states the destination of the party in 
general, not of every individual in it. 

V.5. ovro., these who were mentioned in vy. 4. It is arbitrary 
to limit the reference to the two who are named last. — mpoehOdrres, 
having gone forward in advance of the others. — jpas, us. Luke 
resumes here the first person plural, which has not occurred since 
16, 17. See the remarks on 16, 40. 


‘CHAP. XX. 6, 7.] NOTES. 281 


V. 6. jpeis, we, i. e. Paul, the writer of the narrative, and 
possibly others, in distinction from those who had gone forward to 
Troas. As Timothy was one of that party, it is evident that he 
and the writer of the narrative were different persons. Tholuck, 
Lange,* Ebrard, and others, pronounce this passage sufficient of 

itself to refute the hypothesis that Timothy, not Luke, wrote the 
| portions of the Acts in which the historian speaks as an eyewitness. 
—éferdevoapev. Philippi had a port which connected it with the 
sea; see on 16, 12. — perd ras fyepas rév atipov, after the days of 
unleavened bread, i. e. the festival of the Passover. See the Note 
on 12, 3. — aypis jpepdv mévre, within (lit. unto) five days. The 
time extended to that limit. ‘They must have had an unfavorable 
wind, as the passage was made in about two days on Paul’s first 
journey to Europe; see 16,11. ‘*The weather may have been 
rough with the equinoctial gales.” — jyépas émrd means probably 
about a week (21,4; 28, 14); they arranged it so as to bringa 
Sabbath within the time spent there. If the number be definite, 
then they arrived just at the close of the preceding week. 


V.7-12. Paul preaches at Troas,and administers the Sacrament. 


V. 7. é 7h pia tév caBBdrav, on the first day of the week, i. e. our 
Sunday or Sabbath. In the New Testament eis stands generally for 
mporos in speaking of the days of the week ; see Matt. 28,1; Mark 
16,2; John 20,19, ete. W.{§ 38. It is an imitation of the ordinal 
sense of 1M. See Gesen. Heb. Gr. § 118.4. Olshausen, Neander, 
De Wette, Meyer, and most other critics, recognize here a distinct 
trace of the christian Sabbath in that early age of the church. See 
- also 1 Cor. 16,2,and Rev. 1, 10. ‘Since the sufferings of Christ,” 
says Neander, ‘‘ appeared as the’ central point of all religious ex- 
perience and life, since his resurrection was considered as the foun- 
dation of all christian joy and hope, it was natural that the com- 
munion of the church should have specially distinguished the day 
with which the memory of that event had connected itself.” But 
the introduction of the Sabbath was not only in harmony with 
christian feeling, but, as we have good reason to believe, was sanc- 
tioned and promoted by the special authority of the apostles. “It 
is in the highest degree probable,”’ says Meyer, “‘ that the observance 
of the Sabbath rests upon apostolic institution ; since the gospel 





* Das Leben Jesu nach den Evangelien dargestellt, Erstes Buch, p. 251. 
36 


282 NOTES. [cHaP. Xx. 7-9. 


was extended among the heathen who had not been accustomed to 
the Jewish Sabbath, it was natural and necessary that the apostles 
should instruct them in regard to such a day, on account of the im- 
portance of the resurrection of Christ ; and this supposition is an 
indispensable one, in order to account for the very early and gen- 
eral celebration of the christian Sabbath.’? In support of the last 
remark, this author refers to Justin Martyr, who, born at the begin- 
ning of the second century, says (Apol. II.) that the Christians of 
his time, both in the cities and the country, were accustomed to as- 
semble for worship “‘ on the day called Sunday ” (79 rod #Atov Aeyo- 
pevn jpépa). — ovvnypevov quar, we being assembled ; not trav pabn- 
rav, the received reading, which our version follows. The latter 
term may have been inserted to provide an antecedent for adrois. 
The use of the pronoun is like that in 8, 5.— For xAdoa dprov, see 
on 2, 42. 46. 

V. 8. joa dé Naprddes ixavai, Now there were many lamps; and 
hence the fall of the young man was perceived at once. So 
Meyer explains the object of the remark. But that relation of the 
circumstance to the rest of the narrative is not clearly indicated. 
It has much more the appearance of having proceeded from an 
eyewitness, who mentions the incident, not for the purpose of obvi- 
ating a difficulty which might occur to the reader, but because the 
entire scene to which he refers stood now with such minuteness 
and vividness before his mind. — ev 16 imepdo, in the upper room, 
which, as houses are built in the East, formed “a third story ” con- 
nected with the roof. See Win. Realw. I. p. 466; Rob. Bibl. Res. 
Ill. p. 26. — od jer caries where we were assembled. In the 
received text the verb is jaay, they wi which accords with the 
variation in the last verse. 

V. 9. émi ris Oupidos, upon the window, the seat of it. “ It will 
be recollected that there were no windows of glass; and the win- 
dow here mentioned was a lattice of joinery, or a door, which on 
this occasion was set open on account of the heat from the many 
lights and the number of persons in the room. It should be ob- 
served that the windows of such places in general reached nearly 
to the floor; they would correspond well to what our word ‘ win- 
dow’ signified originally, viz. windore, wind-door, i. e. a door for 
the admission of wind or air.” * — karadepduevos tava Babei, being 





* Illustrated Commentary, Vol. V. p. 206. 


CHAP. XX. 9-13.] NOTES. 283 


overcome with deep sleep. — karevexOeis amd tov tmvov, having been 
borne down from (the effect of) the sleep into which he had sunk. 
This second participial clause states a result of the condition de- 
scribed by the first. — érecev. The window projected (according to 
the side of the room where it was situated) either over the street, or 
over the interior court ; so that in either case he fell from the third 
story upon the hard earth or pavements below. — 7p6n vexpos, was 
taken up dead ; which it is entirely foreign to any intimation of the 
context to qualify by adding “in appearance,” or ‘‘as they sup- 
posed.” 

V. 10. énemecev, x. tr. d., fell upon him, and having embraced 
him, after the example of Elisha in 2 Kings 4, 34. As is that in- 
stance, so in this, the act appears to have been the sign of a mira- 
cle. — 1) OopuBeicbe, do not lament, which, according to the Oriental 
habit and the import of the word, they were doing with loud and 
passionate outcry ; comp. Matt. 9,23; Mark 5, 39. See on 10, 
15. — 4 yap Wuxn .... éorw, for his life is in him, which he could 
say whether he perceived that it was not extinct, or had been re- 
stored. 

V. 11. Before. dprov we are to read roy (Tschdf., Lachm., 
Mey.): the bread, of which they were to partake (v. 7). — yevod- 
pevos, having eaten, because probably they connected a repast with 
the sacrament; see on 2, 42. — éq” ixavévy may refer to the time oc- 
cupied in the entire service ; or, more naturally in this connection, 
to the remainder of the night after the preceding interruption. — 
ovrws, thus, i. e. after these events, then; comp. 17, 33; 28, 14. 

V.12. #yayov, brought him into the assembly (Hems.), not to his 
home. The subject of the verb is indefinite. This circumstance 
is supplementary to what is stated in v. 11; not subsequent to it in 
point of time. — ¢évra, living, which suggests as its antithesis that 
he had been dead; or, at least, that such was their belief. — zape- 
KAnOnoav, were consoled, viz. by his restoration to them. Some’ 
understand it of the effect of Paul’s discourse ; which is incorrect, 
as that is not here the subject of remark. — ov perpiws, not a little, 
very much. Observe the litotes. : 


V. 13-16. They prosecute the Journey to Miletus. 


V. 13. jpeis, we, i. e. the writer and others, without Paul, whom 
they left to follow by land. — eis riv”Acoov, unio Assos, which was 
a coast-town in. Mysia, south of Troas. — éxeidev, from there, be- 


284 NOTES. [cHAP. Xx. 13-15. 


cause the writer has his mind, not on their arrival, but the subse- 
quent departure or progress. — otra ydp, x. tT. d., for so (that they 
should take him at that place) he had arranged for himself ; the 
passive in the sense of the middle. W. § 40. 3.—péddov refers 
to his intention. — mefevew. This foot-journey was about nine 
miles. His object, it is conjectured, may have been to visit friends 
on the way, or to have the, company of brethren from Troas, whom 
the vessel was not large enough to accommodate. 

V. 14. cis ryv”Accor, at Assos, lit. unto, because the preceding 
verb implies the idea of the journey thither on the part of Paul. — 
Mitylene, where they appear to have stopped over night, was on 
the east side of Lesbos, the capital of that island. The distance 
from Assos by sea was about thirty miles. Castro, the present 
capital, stands on the site of the ancient city. The name of the 
island is now Metilino or Metelin, a corruption of Mitylene. 

V. 15. 79 émovon, on the following day after the departure from 
Assos. — dvrixpt Xiov, opposite to Chios, the modern Scio, south of 
Lesbos. The language intimates that they did not visit the island, 
but passed it only, or, at most, lay at anchor off the coast. — Samos 
was another island still further down the AXgean. At one point it 
approaches within six miles of the mainland. It retains still the 
ancient name: It is mentioned to indicate their progress, not be- 
cause they stopped there, as is evident from the next clause. — kat 
peivavres ev TpwyvdAXio, and having remained at Trogyllium, which 
was their next night-station, since on the following day, being the 
fourth, they arrived at Miletus. Trogyllium most commentators 
suppose to be the promontory and the town of that name in south- 
ern Ionia, opposite Samos where it is nearest to the shore. ‘There 
was also an island of the same name on the coast of this promon- 
tory (Strab. 14. 636), which, says Forbiger (Handb. Il. p. 170), 
was unquestionably the Trogyllium intended in this passage. It 
‘agrees with that opinion, that the apostle would have been nearer 
to Ephesus, at Trogyllium on the mainland, than he was at Mile- 
tus, and might be expected to have chosen the nearer place for his 
interview with the Ephesian elders. Still there may have been 
reasons not apparent why he preferred the more distant place. — 
Miletus was on the confines of Caria, twenty-eight miles south of 
Ephesus, and just below the mouth of the Meander. Here they ar- 
rived on Thursday, as the passage occupied four days ; comp. v. 7 
with v. 11. 








CHAP. XX. 16—18.] NOTES. 285 


V. 16. The external testimony requires xexpixe:, instead of 
éxpwe (Grsb., Lachm., Mey.): For he had determined to sail past 
Ephesus, which explains why they had left that city at the north; 
they were opposite to it when at Samos. The vessel was subject 
evidently to Paul’s disposal, having been hired probably for the 
voyage. — émws.... év rH Acia, that it might not happen to him, 
i. e. that he might avoid inducements, to spend time, to delay, in 
Asia. He might have gone to Ephesus and returned during the 
time that he remained at Miletus; but he feared to trust himself 
there lest the importunity of friends or the condition of the church 
might detain him too long, or even lead him to alter his purpose. 
—orevde ydp, for he hastened, if it were possible for him, etc. 
More than three of the seven weeks between, the Passover and Pen- 
tecost had elapsed already. One had expired before they left 
Philippi; they were five days on the way to Troas, remained there 
seven days, and were four days on the way to Miletus. — For 
mevtnkooTns, see on 2, 1. — yevéoda implies motion, and takes after 


it eis. 


V. 17-35. The Address of Paul to the Ephesian Elders at 
Miletus. 


His subject is fidelity in the ministerial office ; first, as illustrated 

in his own example ; and secondly, as required of those whom the 
Spirit has called to this office. In vy. 18-21 he reminds his hear- 
ers of his conduct while he lived among them; in v. 19-25 he in- 
forms them that he is about to be separated from them for ever ; 
and in v. 26-35 he charges them to be watchful for the safety of 
‘the flock intrusted to them, and to be exposed in future to so many 
dangers. 
_ V. 17. apecButépovs — éemoxdrovs (v. 28). Compare the Note 
on 14, 23.— Luke speaks only of the Ephesian elders as sum- 
moned to meet the apostle at Miletus ; but as the report of his ar- 
rival must have spread rapidly, it could not fail to have drawn to- 
gether others also, not only from Ephesus, but from the neighbor- 
ing towns where churches had been established. See on v. 25. 

V. 18. speis is emphatic; see on 10, 15.—dmrd mpdrys.... 
‘Aoiay we are to connect with was... . éyevduny (Kuin., De Wet.) ; 
not with ericracbe (Mey.). The duration of the period is stated in 
v. 31.— For rév before mavra, the whole, comp. Gal. 5, 14, and 
1 Tim. 1,16. W.§ 17. 10. a; K. § 246. 5. £. 


2&6 NOTES. [CHAP. XxX. 19— 21. 


V. 19. pera mdons rarewoppootmns, with all, the utmost (see on 
4, 29), lowliness of mind, humility ; its opposite is dyndd dpoveiv 
(Rom. 12, 16). Compare Phil. 2, 3 and 1 Pet. 5,5. This use of 
nas, says Tholuck,* is eminently Pauline ; comp. Eph. 1, 3. 8; 
4,2; 6,18; 2 Cor. 12,12; 1 Tim. 3,4; 2 Tim. 4, 2; Tit. 
2, 15; 3, 2.— daxpiwr, with tears of solicitude for their salvation ; 
see v.31. Compare 2 Cor. 2, 4 and Phil. 3, 18. odd» before 
Saxptov in the common text should be dropped (Grsb., Mey., 
Tschdf.). —metpaopay, trials, persecutions, which he suffered from 
his countrymen. Luke has not spoken distinctly of these Jewish 
machinations at Ephesus; but in 19, 9 he describes a state of feel- 
ing on the part of the Jews, which must have been a prolific source 
of hostility both to the person of the apostle and to the objects of 
his ministry. That his situation there was one of constant peril we 
see from 1 Cor. 15, 31. 32; 16,9; and 2 Cor. 1, 8-10. 

V. 20. as ovdév, x. r. X., depends still on émicracbe (v. 18); but 
illustrates at the same time the intervening més éyevduny: how (not 
that) I kept back nothing of the things expedient, i. e. out of re- 
gard to men’s censure or their favor. How perfectly this remark 
harmonizes with Paul’s character we have proof in such passages as 
2 Cor. 4, 2; Gal. 1,10; 1 Thess. 2, 4.— rod pi) avayyeirar, x. T. As, 
may be an epexegetical clause, or may depend on tmecre:Aduny, as 
in v. 27 (De Wet.) : that I did not (should not) announce unto you 
and teach you; i. e. he withheld nothing from them which would 
have been equivalent to this, viz. that he neglected to declare the 
truth, or suppressed it; see on 10, 37. — dnyooia, in public, as in 
the synagogue (19, 8), or in the school of Tyrannus (19, 9).— 
kar’ oixous, in houses, private assemblies. 

V. 21. cis rov Ocdv perdvoay, repentance in respect to God, 
i. e. exercised towards him as especially wronged by sin (Olsh., 
Mey.). De Wette supposes a breviloquence, as in 8, 22: repent- 
ance (with a return) unto God. Compare 26, 20. The first sense 
agrees best with the use of es in the next clause. 

‘It appears,” says Tholuck, ‘“* to belong to the peculiarities of the 
apostle that he in particular appeals so often to his blameless man- 
ner of life. The occasion for this lies sometimes in the calumnies 





* « Die Reden des Apostels Paulus in der Apostelgeschichte, mit seinen 
Briefen verglichen,” in the Studien und Kritiken, 1839, p. 305 sq. I 
have drawn several of the Notes on this address from that Article. 


Se a TR ee ae 


CHAP. XX. 21—23.] NOTES. 287 


of his enemies, as when he says in 2 Cor. 1, 12: ‘ For our boasting 
(xadxnovs) is this, the testimony of our conscience, that in simplicity 
and godly sincerity, not with fleshly wisdom, but by the grace of 
God, we have had our conversation in the world, and more especial- 
ly among you.’ The eleventh chapter shows what adversaries he 
had in view in this self-justification. But often these appeals spring 
only from that just confidence with which he can call upon others 
to imitate him, as he himself imitates the Saviour. ‘Thus in 1 Cor. 
11, 1 he cries: ‘ Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of 
Christ’; and in Phil. 3,17: ‘ Brethren, be followers together of 
me, and mark them who walk so as ye have us for an ensample.’ 
Such personal testimonies are not found in the other Epistles of the 
New Testament, nor are they frequent in the writings of other 
pious men; on which account we are authorized to consider their 
occurrence in this discourse (v. 18-21) as a mark of its historical 
character.” 

V. 22. dedepévos rH mvevpatt, bound in the spirit, i. e. his own 
(19, 21) ; constrained by an invincible impulse or sense of duty, 
somewhat as we say ‘bound in conscience” (Hnr., Kuin., De 
Wet., Rob.). Some understand mvedpars of the Holy Spirit: urged 
by his influence or command (Calv., Kypk.). The sense bound in 
spirit, i. e. viewing myself as already in chains (Chrys., Grot., 
Bng.), anticipates the sequel of the sentence. | 

V. 23. xara wédw, from city to city, as he pursued the present 
journey. — S:apapruperai pou, testifies fully to me, not by an inward 
revelation (for why should he have received that xara modw?), 
but through the prophetic announcement of others. Luke has not 
recorded the instances; they may have occurred at Philippi, at 
Troas, at Assos. He mentions two such communications which 
were made to Paul after this; see 21, 4. 11. The common text 
leaves out yo, which belongs after the verb. —pévovow, await me, 
not wherever he went, but at Jerusalem. opevouat eis ‘IepovoaAnp 
determines the place. — Paley compares this verse with Rom. 
15, 30,:which Epistle the apostle had just written at Corinth. He 
there entreats the Roman Christians “ to strive together with him in 
their prayers to God for him, that he might be delivered from them 
who believed not in Judea.” The two passages, therefore, ‘ without 
any resemblance between them that could induce us to suspect that 
they were borrowed from one another, represent the state of Paul’s 
mind, with respect to the event of the journey, in terms of substan- 


288 : NOTES. [CHAP. XX. 23 — 25. 


tial agreement. They both express his sense of danger in the ap- 
proaching visit to Jerusalem ; they both express the doubt which 
dwelt upon his thoughts concerning what might there befall him.” 

V. 24. od8evds Adyov rowwdpar, I make account of nothing, i. e. 
which I may be called to suffer. On the contrary, as he says in 
2 Cor. 12, 10: “I take pleasure in infirmities, in reproaches, in 
necessities, in persecutions, in distresses, for Christ’s sake.” — as 
rededoat Tov Spdpov pov, that (telic) I may finish my course. That 
he should shrink from no danger, that he should be willing to offer 
up his life for the sake of the gospel, he regarded as due to his office, 
as essential to his character as an approved minister of Christ. ‘This 
is the only place in the New Testament where os occurs with the in- 
finitive, except in the phrase és mos ciety (Heb. 7,9). W.§ 45. 3. 
— Some critics (Lachm., Mey., Tschdf.) omit pera xapas after Spopor 
pov. It is wanting in several important authorities. — diayapripaclat 
.... 700 Oeo0 defines in what the dvaxovia consisted ; the infinitive may 
depend on the verbal idea involved in that noun (De Wet.): (com- 
manding or requiring) that I should testify fully, etc. ; or it may 
follow as epexegetical. See W. § 45. 8.c.— In the sublime lan- 
guage of this verse we hear distinctly the voice of the man who, 
on approaching the end of his career, could say: ‘I am now ready 
to be offered, and the time of my departure is at hand. I have 
fought a good fight ; I have finished my course, I have kept the 
faith. Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness 
which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day” 
(2 Tim. 4,6-8). Compare also Phil. 2, 17. 

V. 25. xai viv resumes the thought in v. 22.— oida expresses, 
not an apprehension or a presentiment, but a conviction. — ér 
obxért, x. TA. If Paul’s Roman captivity closed with his death, he 
certainly never saw the Ephesian elders after this interview. 
*s Nor, if we suppose him to have been liberated, can any contra- 
dictory result be urged on that ground, since the traditions of the 
fathers decide nothing in regard to the journeys of the apostle be- 
tween his supposed liberation and his second captivity.” (Mey.) 
It has been proposed to emphasize zavres, as if some of them at 
least might hope to renew their intercourse with him; but that 
qualification is inconsistent with v. 37, 38. —év ois SiOov, among 
whom I went about, intimates a wider circuit of labor than that fur- 
nished by a single city. The apostle either addressed those who 
had come from different churches in the region (see on v. 17), or 





CHAP. XX. 25—28.] NOTES. 289 


at this point of the discourse he recognized the Ephesian elders as 
the representatives of these churches. Some understand 8&7) or to 
describe Paul’s labors in various parts of Ephesus, or the visits 
which he made to the houses of the presbyters. 

V. 26. 80, therefore ; since it was proper for him to close his 
ministry with such a testimony. — ért ka@apds, x. r.. See on 18, 6. 
In this clause ejui may have been displaced from the text (Grsb., 
Lachm., Mey.). 

V.27. ob yap, x. r. X., T have not shrunk back that I should not 
declare unto you. Compare on vy. 20.—rijv Bovdjy tod Oeov, the 
plan of God as to the way of saving men, unfolded in the gospel. 

V. 28. mpocéxere obv, x. tr. ., Take heed, therefore, (since in fu- 
ture the responsibility will rest on you,) unto yourselves (that ye be 
faithful), and unto all the flock (that they be kept from error). 
Here Paul speaks just as he writes in 1 Tim. 4, 16.—év 6, in 
which, since the bishops made part of the flock, while they had the 
direction of it.— 7d mvetpa @Oero may refer to their having been 
chosen under the direction of the Spirit (13, 2 ; 14, 23), or to their 
having been qualified for their office by the Spirit (1 Cor. 12, 8). 
— rotpaive includes the idea not only of instruction, but of govern- 
ment and of supervision in general; comp. 1 Pet. 5,2. See the 
Note on 14, 23. — rv éxkAnoiay rod kvpiov, or Geov. The reading 
here is disputed. ‘The external testimony preponderates in favor of 
kupiov, and most of the recent critics accept that as the original 
word. Some, as Bengel, Knapp, Rinck, Scholz, decide for @ecod. 
The internal argument is claimed on both sides. It is said that 
cod agrees best with the usage of Paul, since in his Epistles éx«Ay- 
_ gia Tov beod occurs eleven times, éxxAnoia rod Xpiorov once, but never 
€xkAnoia Tov kupiov. It is replied to this, that the uncommon expres- 
sion is more likely to have been exchanged for the ordinary one than 
the reverse.* A few manuscripts contain 6eod cai xupiov, and a few 
kupiov Kal Geo. — hv mrepreroinoaro, which he (has redeemed and thus) 
obtained for himself (as a possession) ; comp. iva Autpdanra: fas 
avo mdons dvouias, kat kabapion éavt@ Aady meprovoroy (Tit. 2,14); and 
ads els weperoinow (1 Pet. 2, 9). —&:a rod idiov aiyaros represents the 
atonement as consisting preéminently in the sacrifice and death of 





* For a view of the testimonies in the case, see Davidson’s Lectures 
on Biblical Criticism, p. 175 sq. He adopts rod xupiov as the probable 
reading. 


37 


290 NOTES. [cHAP. xx, 28-32. 


Christ. See Matt. 20,28; Rom. 3, 24; Eph. 1,7; 1 Tim. 2,6; 
Heb. 9, 12; 18, 12, etc. 

V. 29. rodro gives prominence to the following clause ; comp. 
9,21. W. § 23. 4.—cicededoovra is said of those who should 
come to them from other places. — pera riv adpiéiv pov, not after 
my decease (De Wet.), but my departure. era tiv améw (lon. for 
apiéw) rhv eis OnBas occurs in Herod. 9. 1'7.—ddcor Bapeis, violent, 
rapacious, wolves, which represent here, not persecutors, but false 
teachers ; see v. 30. ‘These men would be as far from correspond- 
ing to their professed character as guardians of the flock, as fierce 
wolves are unlike the faithful shepherd. 

V. 30. 2e& ipay airav, from you yourselves, i. e. from their own 
community ; not necessarily from the number of those present. — 
That the danger which Paul announced was realized, we learn 
from the Epistles to Timothy (see especially 2 Tim. 2, 17) and 
from Rev. 2,2. The latter passage shows that some of these false 
teachers, in order to strengthen their influence, laid claim to the 
authority of apostles. 

V. 31. 8d ypyyopeire, Therefore watch; since their vigilance 
should be equal to the dangers which threatened them. — pynpo- 
vetovtes, k.t. A. How they should watch, with what constancy and 
solicitude, they had been taught by his own example. — rpreriay 
may be a proximate expression, but must come nearer to three 
years than two. See the Note on 19,10. In Rey. 2, 2. 3, we 
have an interesting proof that the apostle’s admonition was not in 
vain. ‘Thou hast tried them,” it is said of the church at Ephesus, 
‘*‘ who say that they are apostles and are not, and hast found them 
liars; .... and for my name’s sake hast labored and hast not 
fainted.” | 

V. 32. ddeAdoi fails in so many copies as to be doubtful. — ré 
Aoy@ ths xdpiros avtodv. He commends, or commits, them to this 
word, i. €., in this connection, to its power as the instrumentality 
which God employs for the religious confirmation and security of 
his people. — 76 Suvapev@ it is best to refer to Oe6 as the principal 
word (Calv., Bng., Mey., De Wet.). Some connect it with Adyo 
(Hnr., Kuin.). — éroxodopjoa, to build up further, has better sup- 


port than oixodopjoa. ‘This term reminds us of Eph. 2, 20, and 


can be taken only in the sense of that passage. Remarkable, also, 
is the expression kAnpovopia ev rois nyacpévas maow. Here mdvres 
gives prominence to the idea of a great company of the holy, and 


ee ee ating 





— 2 ee a 


CHAP. XX. 32-35. ] NOTES. 291 


reminds us again of Eph. 3,18. The expression, ‘ an inheritance 
among the sanctified,’ i. e. participation in the spiritual blessings 
which exist among them, is likewise peculiarly Pauline, and occurs 
further only in the words of Paul in 26, 18 and in Eph. ], 18.” 
(Thol.) 

V. 33. He warns them here against covetousness, — inaticpod, 
raiment. ‘The wealth of the Orientals consisted in part of costly 
garments; they trafficked in them or kept them in store for future 
use. See Ez. 2, 69; Neh. 7, 70; Job 27, 16; 2 Kings 5, 26. 
This fact accounts for the allusion to the destructive power of the 
moth, as well as rust, in Matt. 6, 19 and James 5, 2. 

V. 34. kal rots odou per éuod is an instance of varied construc- 
tion: and to (the wants of) those with me. W. § 64. IIL. 1.— ai 
xeipes atrat, these hands, which we may suppose him to have held 
up to view as he spoke, and which may have been marked with 
traces of the toil to which they were inured. See the Note on 
17, 10 and 18, 3. — This allusion to the apostle’s habit of manual 
labor while he was at Ephesus accords remarkably with 1 Cor. 
4,11. 12. Luke has said nothing of it in his narrative of Paul’s 
residence in that city (19, 1 sq.). But in the above-named passage 
of the Epistle, which Paul wrote just before his departure from 
Ephesus, we find him saying: “* Unto this present hour... . we 
labor, working with our own hands.” Nothing could be more un- 
designed than this agreement. ‘It is manifest that, if the history 
in this passage had been taken from the Epistle, this circumstance, 
if it appeared at all, would have appeared in its place, that is, in 
the direct account of Paul’s transactions at Ephesus. The corre- 
- spondence would not have been effected, as it is, by a kind of re- 
flected stroke, that is, by a reference in a subsequent speech to 
what in the narrative was omitted. Nor is it likely, on the other 
hand, that a circumstance which is not extant in the history of Paul 
at Ephesus, should have been made the subject of a fictitious allu- 
sion, in an Epistle purporting to be written by him from that place; _ 
not to mention that the allusion itself, especially in time, is too 
oblique and general to answer any purpose of forgery whatever.” 
Paley. 

V. 35. mdyra, not all things as the object of tmédaéa (Eng. 
vers.), but adverbial, in all ways, i. e. by doctrine and by example ; 
comp. 1 Cor. 10, 33; Eph. 4, 15.—otre xomdévras, so laboring, 
viz. as I have done. — dei dvtiAapBaverOa trav dabevoivrav, that you 


292 NOTES. [CHAP. Xx. 35. 


ought to assist the weak, feeble, i. e. the poor, whom this mode of 
designation contrasts with the rich, who are strong, powerful. 
(Chrys., Kuin., Olsh., De Wet., Rob.). The examples in Wet- 
stein sanction this meaning of doOevolvrev. See also Rob. Lex.s. v. 
But the stricter sense of the word (4,9; 5, 15; Matt. 25, 39, etc.) 
is entirely appropriate: the weak, i. e. those unable in consequence 
of physical infirmity to labor for their own support. The apostle 
would enforce here the duty of industry and self-denial, in order to 
procure the means of relieving those who are disabled by any cause 
from taking care of themselves. He holds up to them his own ex- 
ample, his diligence in labor, as worthy of their imitation. Com- 
pare 2 Thess. 3, '7 sq. 

But some critics find the idea to be a different one from the 
foregoing. ‘They understand doOevotyrav of the weak in their re- 
ligious faith or principles. The apostle’s object was to exhort the 
elders to maintain themselves by their own labor, out of regard to 
those who would not appreciate their claim to support, who would 
take offence at the appearance of any thing like a mercenary spirit 
in their teachers. So Calvin, Bengel, Neander, Meyer, Tholuck, 
and others. It is alleged that this interpretation is necessary, in or- 
der to make the cases parallel; that, as Paul labored for his own 
support, so the object of their labor must be the same. But otra 
komiovras does not require that sort of correspondence ; instead of 
the motive, it may refer equally well to the manner of his labor, 
i. e. to his assiduity in it, which he would have them imitate, though 
the end proposed was different. It is not easy to obviate the objec- 
tions to this view; first, that dvriAapBaveoOa is inapposite, with that 
meaning; secondly, that some word or the context should define 
do bevotvrev, qualified by +7 miores in Rom. 14, 1 sq., and in effect by 
th ovvednoe in 1 Cor. 8, 9 (compared with v.'7); and, thirdly, that 
it destroys the opposition between the giving of personal favors and 
the reception of them, as contemplated in the words of Christ. The 
use of rév dobevdy in 1 Thess. 5, 14 weakens the second objection ; 
but in reply to the third, those who defend this explanation are obliged 
to say, that, though AapuBdvew refers to the body, d:ddvae must be un- 
derstood of spiritual gifts or labors for the soul. It may be added, 
that Paul, although he waived his own right to a maintenance from 
those to whom he preached, was remarkable for the decision with 
which he asserted that right in behalf of others; comp. Rom. 
15,27; 1 Cor. 9, 13. 14; Gal. 6,6; 1 Tim. 5, 17. 18. See also 


CHAP. XX. 35-38. ] NOTES. 293 


Luke 10, '7.— dri adrds, that he himself. Our English translation 
overlooks the emphasis. — paxdpiov... . AapBdvew. ‘The Evangelists 
have not recorded this saying of Christ. It comes down to us here 
as an interesting specimen of the many such words that fell from 
his lips and were treasured up in the memory of the first disciples, 
but which no similar intervention has rescued from oblivion. It 
will be noticed that Paul alludes to the remark as familiar to his 
hearers. — The best authorities read paAdov diddvae instead of the 
inverse order. 


V. 36-38. Paul prays with the Elders, and reémbarks. 


V. 36. dels ra yovara, having kneeled (7, 60; 9, 40). This 
was the attitude in prayer which prevailed among the early Chris- 
tians, except on the Sabbath and during the seven weeks before 
Pentecost, when they generally stood. They regarded the latter 
posture as the more appropriate one for the expression of gratitude, 
and adopted it, therefore, on joyful occasions. 

V. 37. The scene here is a touching one; the simplicity of 
Luke’s description heightens the effect of it. — kai émureodvtes .... 
TavAov, and having fallen upon the neck of Paul. In the same 
manner Joseph manifested his strong affection for Benjamin his 
brother (Gen. 45, 14), and for Jacob his father (Gen. 46, 29), after 
their long separation from each other. It was in accordance with 
Oriental manners. — xatepidovv, kissed tenderly. The preposition 
strengthens the verb; comp. Matt. 26, 49. 

V. 38. ¢ <iprxer, which he had spoken (pluperf.); dative by 
attraction. W. § 24. 1.— én is declarative. — dewpeiv = Oedopat 
-(Tittm. de Syn. p. 120), behold, contemplate ; stronger than deode 
(v. 25). It suggests the idea of the interest and affection with 
which they looked upon that countenance for the last time. — 
mpoereprrov, They sent forward, conducted; see the Note on 
15, 3. 


(294 NOTES. [cHAP. XxI. 1. 


CHAPTER XXII. 


V. 1-6. They continue the Voyageto Tyre. 


V.1. as de éyévero, x. tr. X., When now it came to pass that we 
put to sea. The construction is like that in v. 5. — droonacbévras 
dr atrav, having departed from them (De Wet., Rob.) ; not, after 
many of the older critics, having torn ourselves from them, which 
would be inappropriate in Luke 22,41. Some contend still for the 
stronger sense (Kuin., Mey.). — edévdpounoavres shows that the wind 
was in their favor; see on 16, 11.— 6 is for the more regular 
Kéy ; see on ’AmoAdo in 19, 1. Cos, or Co, was a small island on 
the Carian coast, situated between the promontories on which stood 
Cnidus and Halicarnassus. Its present name is Stanchio, which has 
arisen from a slurred pronunciation of és ray Kéy, like Stambul from 
és rav wok. — Rhodes was at the entrance of the Augean, on the 
coast of Caria. Its capital bore the same name, and was famous 
for the colossus which stood across its harbor. ‘The statue was 
prostrate at this time, having been overthrown by an earthquake. — 
Patara was a coast-town of Lycia, at some distance, from the left 
bank of the Xanthus.* It was best known for its celebrated oracle 
of Apollo, which, in the height of its authority, had almost rivalled 
that of Delphos. How near to it in the person of these wayfaring 
men was now brought the power which was to subvert that great 
delusion of heathenism! How soon after this could it be said, in 
the words of Milton’s Hymn on the Nativity of Christ: 

The oracles are dumb, 
No voice or hideous hum 
Runs through the arched roof in words deceiving. 





* « Here are still seen the triple arch which formed the gate of the city, 
the baths, and the theatre. The latter is scooped out of the side of a hill, 
and is remarkable for the completeness of the proscenium and the steepness 
and narrowness of its marble seats. Above it is the singular pit, excavated 
on the summit of the same hill, with its central square column, conjectured, 
with probability, by Captain Beaufort, to have been the seat of the oracle 
of Apollo Patareus, — Now its port is an inland marsh, generating poison- 
ous malaria, and the mariner sailing along the coast would never guess that 
the sand-hills before him blocked up the harbor into which St. Paul sailed 
of old.’’ — Travels in Lycia by Spratt and Forbes, Vol. I. p. 31. 


CHAP. XXI. 1—3.] NOTES. 295 


Apollo from his shrine 

Can no more divine, . 
With hollow shriek the steep of Delphos leaving. 
No nightly trance or breathed speil 
Inspires the pale-eyed priest from the prophetic cell.”’ 


V. 2. The party take now another vessel. We are not informed 
of the reason for this measure. The vessel which had brought 
them thus far may have been adapted only to sailing along the 
shore, or they may have engaged the use of it (see on 20, 16) only 
until they should find an opportunity like the present. — diamepav, 
crossing over just as they arrived. ‘This particularity is as graphic 
“as if taken from a journal written during the voyage.” The 
present participle denotes often an appointed or approaching act ; 
comp. v. 3; 27,6. W.§ 46. 5.c. 

V. 3. dvahavévres 5€ tiv Kinpov, And having had a view of Cy- 
prus, lit. having had it brought up to sight, made visible to us 
above the horizon. The language is that of an eyewitness, and of 
one familiar with the phraseology of seamen, who are accustomed to 
speak of raising the land when they approach it. The opposite ex- 
pression is dmoxpinrew ynv ; see Krug. on Thucyd. 5. 65; Stallb. on 
Prot. 338. A. The corresponding Latin words, says Mr. Humphry, 
are aperire and abscondere (Virg. Ain. 3. 275, 291). Some ren- 
der, being shown Cyprus, having it pointed out to us in the distance 
(Rob.). This verb, which in the active governs a dative and accu- 
sative, retains the latter in the passive. W.§ 40.1; K. § 281.3. 
— katadinévtes abriy, having left it behind. — eidvvpor, on the left, 
is an adjective, not an adverb. K. § 264. 3. a. They passed, 
therefore, to the south of the island. ‘They must have had a fair 
wind to enable them to take that course. — émAéoper eis Supiav refers 
to the voyage to Tyre; for in the Roman age Syria included Phe- 
nicia (Win.), of which Tyre was the commercial emporium. For 
its present state, see Rob. Bibl. Res. Ill. p. 892 sq. — ékeive yap, 
kx. t. A., is best taken as brachylogical: for having come thither 
the ship was unlading (i. e. about to unlade) the cargo. This use 
of the participle coincides essentially with that in v. 2; see further 
Matt. 26, 28; Luke 22,19. Some understand ékeice of the con- 
veyance of the freight from the ship to the town ; for thither (after 
the arrival) was the ship unlading the cargo (Mey., De Wet.). 
The writer would not be likely to specify so minute a circumstance. 
éxeice is not to be confounded with éxei. The clause assigns the 
reason (yap) for their stopping at this port. 


296 NOTES. [cHAP. XXI. 4-8. 


V.4. Kal dvevpovres tos pabnras, and having sought out the dis- 
ciples who resided there. The English version overlooks both the 
preposition and the article. ‘The gospel had been preached here at 
an early period; see on 11,19. The Saviour had performed some 
of his miracles in the vicinity of Tyre and Sidon; see Matt. 15, 
21; Mark '7, 24. — éwepeivayev. See on 10, 48. — jpepas émrd may 
be indefinite, as was remarked on 20,6. They were obliged ap- 
parently to regulate their journey by the convenience of the ship in 
which they had taken passage. We cannot doubt that they occu- 
pied the time spent here in making known the word, and in con- 
sulting for the welfare of the Tyrian church. — oirwes .... eis 
‘IepovoaAnn, who said to Paul through the Spirit that he should not 
go up unto Jerusalem, i. e. if he had any~regard to his own safety 
or personal welfare, or to their affectionate solicitude on his ac- 
count; comp. sapexaAodper, x. Tt. X., in Vv. 12, They were informed 
by the Spirit that bonds and afflictions awaited the apostle at Jeru- 
salem; but it was not revealed to them as the will of God that he 
should desist from his purpose to proceed thither. 

V.5. Gre... éEaprioa. See the first clause in v. 1. — ras 
npepas, the days named in v. 4.— aporeprovrar, as in 20, 38. 


V.7-16. From Tyre they proceed to Ptolemais, and thence to 
Cesarea and Jerusalem. 


V. 7. tpeis .... eis Trodeuaida, Now we, having (thereby) com- 
pleted the voyage, came down from Tyre to Ptolemais. Their ar- 
rival at the latter place terminated the sea part of their journey. 
This city was the ancient Accho (Judg. 1. 31), still called Acco by 
the Arabians, and Acre or St. Jean d’Acre by Europeans. ‘It 
is on the Mediterranean Sea, at the north angle of a bay which is 
named from it, and which extends in a semicircle of three leagues, 
as far as the point of Mount Carmel.” — rods ddeAgous, the brethren 
who were there ; see on v. 4. 

V. 8. They now travelled by land. — The received of wept rév 
Tlatdov after e€eAOovres is untenable. A church reading began here, 
and a more definite subject than jyeis was needed to suggest the 
connection. ‘The gloss has passed into our English translation. — 
eis Katodpevav. ‘This is the third time that Paul has been at Cesarea. 
He was there on his journey from Jerusalem to Tarsus (9, 30), and 
again on his return to Antioch from his second missionary progress 
(18, 22).— Ainmov. See on 8, 40,—rod evayyekiorod. This 





CHAP. XXI. 8—15.] NOTES. 7 297 


title appears to have been given to those who had no stated pas- 
toral charge, but travelled from place to place and preached as 
they had opportunity. See Eph. 4,11; 2 Tim. 4, 5. — dvros é 
tav érrd recalls Philip to the reader as already known to him in 
another capacity ; see 6, 5. ; 

V. 10. spépas mreiovs, many days (comp. 13,31 ; 27, 20), taken 
here in a comparative sense. The apostle was now in the vicinity 
of Jerusalem, and, having travelled rapidly since he left Miletus, 
he had no occasion to hasten his journey ; comp. 20, 16. —”AyaBos 
has been mentioned in 11, 28. He cannot be a different person ; 
for the name, office (xpopyrns), and residence (dé rijs "Iovdaias) are 
the same in both instances. 

V.11. Syoas.... wodas. The prophet performed the act on 
himself, not on Paul. The pronoun should be atrod, not adrod. 
Many of the best manuscripts read éavrod. — otra... . "Iovdaiou. 
The Romans put the apostle in chains, but they did it at the instiga- 
tion of the Jews. — Agabus, like the ancient prophets, accompanied 
his prediction with a symbolic act, which served to place the event 
foretold more vividly before them ; the scene, being thus acted out 
before their eyes, was rendered present, real, beyond what any mere 
verbal declaration could possibly have made it. 

* Segnius irritant animos demissa per aurem, 
Quam que sunt oculis subjecta fidelibus, et que 
Ipse sibi tradit spectator.” 
Examples similar to this are frequent in the Old Testament; see 
1 Kings 22,11; Is. 20, 1 sq.; Jer. 13, 1 sq.; Ezek. 4,1 sq., etc. 

V. 12. iets, we, viz. the writer, Trophimus, Aristarchus (see 
‘on .20, 4), and possibly others. —oi évrémuox restricts itself to the 
Christians of the place. 

V. 13. i moire is the language of remonstance: What are 
you doing that ye weep, etc. The same mode of expression oc- 
curs in Mark 11, 5. —éy yap, x. 7. . Their opposition was not 
only painful to him (cvvOpimrovrés pov tiv kapdiavy), but was use- 
less ; for (ydp) he was not to be shaken in his purpose (De Wet.) ; 
or, which agrees better with éroiyos éyo, their distress was unneces- 
sary; for he deemed it a privilege, not a hardship, to suffer in the 
cause of Christ ; comp. 5, 41. 

V. 15. émuxevardpyevor is to be preferred here to drockevacdpe- 
vor: having packed up our baggage, made ready for the journey. 
Those who adopt the other word generally suppose it to mean, 

38 


298 NOTES. [CHAP. XXI. 15-17. 


having packed away our baggage, i. e. at Caesarea, where they 
left it, or at least the superfluous part of it (Olsh.). But if it was 
their sea-luggage and unnecessary for the rest of the way, why did 
they not leave it at Ptolemais, where they ended the voyage? 
Some insist that, if we retain drocxevacdpevor, we are to explain it 
thus: having packed away (removed) our baggage, i.e. from the 
place where it was stored, in order to carry it with them (De Wet., 
Mey.). With this interpretation the two words yield ultimately the 
same meaning. mapackevacdpevos and dmora€duevos are explanatory 
variations, — “The authorized English version,” says Mr. Hum- 
phry, “‘uses the word ‘ carriage’ in the unusual sense of ‘ things 
carried,’ baggage, as in Judges 18, 21 and 1 Sam. 17, 22. Cran- 
mer has ‘ took up our burdens,’ and the Geneva version ‘ trussed 
up our fardels.” ”’ 

V. 16. ovvpdOor, sc. rwés, Which governs pabnrév ; comp. John 
16, 17. W.§ 66. 4.— dyovres.... Mvaoon stands by attraction 
for dyovres rapa Mvdcwva map o Eenobdpev, bringing us to Mnason 
with whom we should. lodge (Olsh., Mey., De Wet.). His relation 
to them as their host was more important to them than his name, 
and presents itself first, therefore, in the order of statement. Myva- 
gov could depend possibly on dyovres, bringing us to Mnason 
(W.§ 31.2), which affords the same sense ; but the construction is 
hard. Some render bringing Mnason, i. e. with them from Cesa- 
rea; which attributes to them an improbable act, while it leaves the 
dative equally irregular. — dpyaio pabyrh = pabnr® dam’ dpxis, an 
ancient (not an aged) disciple, i. e. who had Jong been such. He 
may have been converted on the day of Pentecost (comp. év dpyj 
in 11, 15), or have been a personal follower of Christ. 


V. 17-26. Paul assumes a Vow, to conciliate the Jewish 
Believers. 


V. 17. The apostle arrives now at Jerusalem for the fifth time 
since he left it on his persecuting errand to Damascus. It is the 
last recorded visit that he ever made to the Jewish capital. His 
present return could not have taken place later than the spring of 
A. D. 59; since we must reserve two years for his imprisonment at 
Cesarea (24, 27), and two for his imprisonment at Rome, before we 
come to A. D. 64.* If we fix upon this limitation on that side, we 





* See Introduction, § 6. 5. 








CHAP, XXI. 17—21.] NOTES. 299 


have then four years as the term of the apostle’s third missionary 
excursion, which we may distribute as follows. He left Antioch 
about the beginning of A. D. 55 (see on 18, 23), and reached Ephe- 
sus in the spring of that year. Here he spent about three years 
(20, 31), and proceeded to Macedonia in the spring of 58 (see 
on 20, 1). He was occupied here and in other parts of Northern 
Greece during the summer and autumn of that year (see on 20, 2), 
and arrived at Corinth early in the following winter. Having spent 
the next three months in that city (20,3), he returned to Mace- 
donia and embarked for Syria in the spring of A. D. 59.* He 
celebrated the Pentecostal feast for that year at Jerusalem. 

V. 18. 1% émovon, i. e. the day after their arrival. — IdxcwBor. 
This is James the Younger, who presided over the church at Jeru- 
salem; comp. 12, 17. As no one of the other apostles is men- 
tioned in this part of the narrative, *it is probable that they were 
either not living or were laboring in foreign lands. 

V.19. domacdpevos atrois. He had performed the same act of 
courtesy on his preceding visit to them; see 18, 22,— da rijs 
Siaxovias avrod, through his ministry in the course of his recent 
journey. 

V.20. xadca pupiddes stands for a large but indefinite number : 
what multitudes. Compare 1 Cor. 4, 15 and 14, 19. — ¢nrorai rod 
vipov, zealots for the law ; an objective or causative genitive (comp. 
Gal. 1, 14).. K. § 265. 2. b. 3 

V.21. ért drocraciay Siddoxets, x. t. d., that thou dost teach 
apostasy from Moses, etc. Neander presents the following just 
view of the transaction related here. ‘This accusation against 
Paul was certainly false in the form in which it was alleged; for 
he opposed the external observance of Judaism only so far as the 
justification and sanctification of men were made to depend upon 





* If we suppose two years and six or nine months to exhaust rpieriay 
in 20, 31, our scheme of chronology would allow us to assign Paul’s re- 
turn to Jerusalem to the spring of the preceding year, viz. that of A. D, 
58. The apostle may have left Antioch on his third tour sufficiently early 
in 54 (see on 18, 22) to have spent several months at Ephesus before 
Pentecost in A. D. 55; and he could then have completed the two remain- 
ing years of his residence in that city, at Pentecost in A. D. 57 (see on 
20,1). The advantage of this computation would be, that it frees us from 
the necessity of crowding the two years of the apostle’s Roman captivity so 
near to the year 64, See the Chronological Outline, at the top of p. 19. 


a. 
Ete: a eed RS 


== + 


300 NOTES. [CHAP. XXI. 21, 22. 


it. It was his principle, that no one should abandon the national 
and civil relations in which he stood at the time of his conversion, 
except for important reasons ; and in accordance with this principle 
he allowed the Jews to adhere to their peculiarities, among which 
was the observance of the Mosaic law (1 Cor. 7, 18). But it could 
not fail to happen that those who entered into Paul’s ideas of the 
relations of the law to the gospel, and were thus freed from their 
scrupulous regard for the former, would be led into a freer line 
of conduct in this respect, and individuals might carry this dis- 
position further than Paul desired. It may be that such instances 
gave occasion to the charge that he persuaded the Jewish Chris- 
tians to release themselves from the law: It is indeed true, that, 
when it was once admitted that circumcision avails nothing as a 
means of obtaining an interest in the kingdom of God, this rite 
must, sooner or later, fall away of itself. But Paul would not hasten 
this result by any arbitrary or violent act; he would leave it to be 
the work of time, and would have no one break away capriciously 
from the relations in which he has been called to be a Christian. 
Hence, without deviating from the principles of strict sincerity, he 
could repel that accusation of the Jewish zealots. He was far from 
entertaining the hatred against Judaism, and the ancient theocratic 
nation, with which his violent opponents charged him. In conform- 
ity with the principle avowed in his Epistles, viz. that he became a 
Jew to the Jews, as he became a heathen to the heathen and weak 
to those who were weak, he declared himself ready to do what 
James proposed to him, in order to refute that accusation. He 
consented to refute it by taking part in the Jewish worship in a 
mode which was highly esteemed by pious Jews.” 

V. 22. ri odv éorr; What, therefe ore, is it 2 viz. which the occa- 
sion requires; comp. 1 Cor. 14, 15. 16.—-dvros . . . . cvvedbeiv, 
It is entirely necessary (inevitable) that a multitude (viz. of the 
Jewish Christians) should come together, i. e. around Paul as he 
appeared in their public assemblies, in the temple and el8ewhere, in 
order to watch his conduct and see whether their suspicions of him 
were just. It is not meant that the church would assemble in a 
body for the purpose of consultation (Calv., Grot.) ; for with that 
idea we should have had 7é before mAjO0s (comp. 4, 32; 15, 12. 
30). Nor does the language intimate that Paul’s advisers appre- 
hended any violent outbreak on the part of the Jewish Christians 
(Kuin.) ; the subsequent riot which led to his apprehension originat- 
ed not with them, but with the unbelieving Jews (comp. v. 27). 








CHAP. XXI. 23-25] NOTES. 301 


V. 23. The advdpes técoapes were certainly Jews, and may be 
supposed from the relation implied in ¢cioly jyiv to have been also 
Jewish believers. — evyjyy exovres ep éavtdv, having a vow upon 
themselves, which, as appears from every circumstance of the de- 
scription, must have been a Nazarite vow. ‘This vow bound those 
who assumed it to let the hair grow, to abstain from intoxicating 
drink, and in other respects to maintain a life of ascetic rigor 
(Numb. 6, 2 sq.). It was left to their option how long they con- 
tinued such a vow ; though it seems to have been customary among 
the Jews of this period to extend it at least to thirty days (Jos. Bell. 
Jud. 2. 15. 1). “ When the time specified in the vow was com- 
pleted, the Nazarite offered a ram of a year old for a burnt-offering, 
a sheep of the samé age for a sin-offering, a ram for a thank-offer- 
ing, a basket of unleavened cakes, and a libation of wine. His 
hair was shaven off at the gate of the sanctuary, and cast into the 
fire where the thank-offering was burning. He offered as a wave- 
offering to God, the shoulders of the thank-offering and two cakes, 
which were both given to the priest.” Jahn’s Archeol. § 395. 

V. 24. rovrovs rapadaBar, these taking with thyself, as associates 
in the vow. — éyvicOntt ovv abrois, purify thyself with them; enter 
upon the same course of abstinence and religious consecration. — 
kal Saraynoor én’ avrois, and spend upon them, incur expense on their 
account. ‘ As, in some instances, the Nazarites had not sufficient 
property to enable them to meet the whole expense of the offer- 
ings, other persons who possessed more defrayed the expense for 
them, or shared it with them, and in this way were made parties to 
the vow.” The Jews looked upon it as an act of special merit to 
assist a Nazarite in this manner. Josephus relates (Antt. 19. 6. 1) 
that Agrippa the First, on his arrival at Jerusalem after having ob- 
tained the sovereignty of Palestine, paid the expense of numerous 
indigent Nazarites who were waiting to be released from their vows. 
He intended it as a thank-offering for his good fortune. — cai yvd- 
covrat wavres, and all shall know by this act. yvéou and ydcarra, 
all may know (Eng. vers.), are grammatical corrections, founded on 
the false view that this clause depends on iva. — kai avrds, also thy- 
self, as well as they. 

V. 25. wept d€ rév memorevxitav ebvav, But (as we are both 
aware) in regard to the Gentiles who have believed, etc. — ieis, 
we, i. e. the apostles and Christians at Jerusalem ; for the adoption 
of the decree was properly their act (comp. 15, 22), and not that 


302 NOTES. [CHAP. XXI. 25, 26. 


= 


of Paul and the other delegates from Antioch who submitted to 
them the question which the decree settled (15, 1). The ob- 
ject of the reminiscent remark in this verse was to obviate any 
scruple that Paul might feel, lest the proposed measure should in- 
terfere with the liberty of the Gentile converts. — ei pi) puddooecbat, 
x. tT. . See the Note on 15, 20. 

V. 26. sapadaBev refers to his connecting himself with them, as 
in v. 24; not to his taking them to the temple. — 79 éyouévy jpepa, 
i. e. the day after his interview with James, and the third since his 
arrival at Jerusalem (v. 18).— ody avrois belongs to dynobeis, not 
to clones (Mey.) ; comp. v. 24. — duayyéhrov .... dynuopod, announ- 
cing, viz. to the priests (note eis rd iepdv) the fulfilment (i. e. his in- 
tended observance) of the days of the purification, i. e. probably of 
the remaining days during which the Nazariteship of the four men 
was to continue; the number of which days was seven (v. 27). 
Stier, De Wette, Meyer,* Robinson, and others, adopt essentially this 
view. ‘The convenience of the priests may have required such a 
notification to enable them to prepare for the concluding ceremony 
at the temple. But éxmAnpwow has received other explanations. 
Some suppose Paul to have given notice of the actual completion 
of the men’s vow (Wiesl.), and others, of the period of its comple- 
tion, i.e. the time when it would cease. The second of these 
two opinions is better than the first; for the first is opposed to edpoy 
pe nyvicpevov ev ro iepo in 24, 18. The apostle’s arrest (v. 27) was 
subsequent to his present appearance in the temple, and at the time 
of the arrest, as we see from the words just quoted, he was still ob- 
serving his part of the vow. — éws od, «. r. X., depends on the ver- 
bal idea in éxmAnpwow: (he would observe the days) until the offer- 
ing (prescribed in such cases ; see on v. 23) was brought. Some 
connect this clause with eioye: eis rd iepov: he went into the temple 
(and staid there) until the offering was brought. ‘The objection to 
this is (to say nothing of the ellipsis), that the men would be repre- 
sented as absolved from their obligation, while that of Paul still con- 
tinued. — avraév refers to advdpas. The apostle had no sacrifice to 
bring on his own account. 





* He presents his opinion more clearly in his Translation of the New 
Testament, than in his Commentary. 


4 2 
A eee Oe en a. 


CHAP. XXI. 27, 28.] NOTES. 303 


V. 27-30. Paul is seized by the Jews, and dragged from the 
Temple. 


V. 27. ds dé fueddov, k. r. A., Now as the seven days were about 
to be completed, i. e. according to the view generally entertained, 
the seven days during which the vow of these Nazarites was still to 
continue after Paul became a party to it (Bng., Kuin., Olsh., De 
Wet.). ai in this case refers to the days mentioned in v. 26. 
Neander’s idea that the seven days constituted the entire period of 
their vow, and that Paul joined them on one of the last of these 
days, appears to me inconsistent with iva Evpnowrrat thy Kepadny in 
v. 24. Wieseler reasserits the view of some of the older inter- 
preters: the seven days observed as the feast of Pentecost. He 
supposes that sense to suggest itself readily after the statement in 
20, 16, that Paul was hastening to keep this feast at Jerusalem, 
and that it is required in order to reduce the time between his ar- 
rival there and his subsequent trial at Ceesarea to twelve days (24, 
11). But ai before érra jyepa in this connection recalls most natu- 
rally the jpepay rod éynopod just spoken of; the time in 24, 11 may 
be computed in different ways (see the Note there) ; and above all, 
we need more evidence that the Jews observed Pentecost as a heb- 
domadal festival. ‘The law of its institution prescribed but one day, 
though the later Jews, it would seem, added a second (Win.).— 
oi dnd Tis *Agias Iovdaior, the Jews from Asia, i.e. the province of 
that name where Paul had resided so long (20,31). Some of them 
may have been from Ephesus, who would recognize Trophimus 
(v. 29) as a fellow-townsman. 

V. 28. Bondetre, help, i. e. to apprehend him, or to wreak ven- 
geance on him. — érz re kai, and further also; comp. 2, 26. It is 
one of Luke’s peculiar phrases. —’EAnvas may be the plural of 
the class or category, because what Paul had done in the case of 
one, he might be said in point of principle to have done for many ; 
or it may have been an exaggeration for the purpose of increasing 
the tumult. — eis rd iepov, into the temple, i, e. the part of it inter- 
dicted to foreigners. ‘The outer court or inclosure was called the 
court of the Gentiles, and could be entered by them without prof- 
anation. The second court, or that of the Israelites, was sur- 
rounded with marble pillars, on which, as Philo states, was inscribed 
in Latin and Greek: “On penalty of death let no foreigner go 
farther.” 


304 NOTES. [CHAP. XXI. 29 - 32. 


V. 29. For Trophimus, see on 20, 4.— dv évopiov, x. 7. X. 
They had seen Trophimus in the city with him, and-from that 
rushed to the conclusion that he had brought Greeks into the tem- 
ple. “ Zelote putantes,” says Bengel, ‘‘ seepe errant.” 

V. 30. cidkov.... iepod, they dragged him out.of the temple, so 
as not to pollute it with blood. They had determined already to 
kill him. Bengel conjectures that they wished to prevent him from 
taking refuge at the altar. But the Mosaic law restricted the right 
of asylum to those who had been guilty of accidental murder ; 
see Ex. 21, 18. 14. — éxrcicOnoay ai Ovpa, the doors (of the second 
court) were closed, probably by the Levites, who had the care of the 
temple ; see the Note on 4,1. They may have feared that the 
crowd would return, or some new disturbance arise. 


V. 31-40. The Roman Commander rescues Paul from the Hands 
. of the Jews. 


V. 31. nrotvrey 8¢ adrév amoxreiva, Now while they were seek- 
ing to kill him; they were beating him for that purpose (see v. 32). 
But as the onset had been sudden, and they were not furnished with 
weapons, some delay intervened. It was nothing in all human ap- 
pearance but that momentary delay, that saved now the life of the 
apostle. The Roman officer had time to appear and snatch him 
from impending death. — avéBn, xk. rt... a report went up to the 
chiliarch of the cohort; see his name in 238,26. It was but the 
work of a moment to convey to him the information. He had his 
station in the castle of Antonia, which was on a rock or hill at the 
northwest angle of the temple-area. The tower at the southeast 
corner of the castle ‘“* was seventy cubits high, and overlooked the 
whole temple with its courts. ‘The fortress communicated with the 
northern and western porticos of the temple-area, and had flights 
of stairs descending into both; by which the garrison could at any 
time enter the court of the temple and prevent tumults.” Bibl. 
Res. I. p. 482. During the festivals it was customary to keep the 
troops in readiness to suppress the riots which were so liable to oc- 
cur at such times (comp. on 10, 37). See Jos. Antt. 20. 5.3; 
Bell. Jud. 5.5.8 

V. 32. éxarovrdépxous, centurions, each with his proper comple- 
ment of men. The chiliarch ordered out a force sufficiently large 
to intimidate all opposition. — karéSpapev em avrovs, ran down upon 
them. ‘To that despatch Paul was indebted for his escape ; note 








CHAP. XXI. 32—38.] NOTES. 305 


also ééavrijs. This verb corresponds to avé8n in v. 31. — oi 8€ i8dv- 
tes, x. t. X. They knew the consequences too well to run the risk 
of a collision with the Roman troops. See on 19, 24. 

V. 33. Sebjvar dddcect Svai, to be bound with two chains, i. e. to 
have his arms fastened to two soldiers, one on each side of him. 
The mode was described in the Note on 12, 6. — ris dv ety, who he 
might be, since his name and rank were uncertain. — kai ri éort 
merroinkos, and what he has done. 'The form of the inquiry presup- 
poses that he had committed some crime. W. § 42. 4. c. 

V. 34. eis rhv mapeuBornv, into the garrison or barracks ; not 
the castle (Eng. vers.), but the part of it assigned to the soldiers. 

V. 35. emi rods dvaBabpovs, upon the stairs which led up to the 
_ castle. — cuvéBn, x. tr. X., it happened that he was borne (upon their 
shoulders probably) by the soldiers. ¢Baord{ero without ovvéBy 
would have called attention less distinctly to the peril of his situa-— 
tion, requiring such a precaution for his safety. 

V. 36. aipe is imperative present because jKxodovde (imperf.) 
represents the cry as a continued one. Compare dpoy in John 19, 
15, where the aorist precedes. 

V. 37. ‘EdAqnoti ywoores; Dost thou know Greek 2 The ad- 
verb stands in the place of the object (20, 13), and Aadew is not to 
be supplied (Kuin.); comp. rods Supiott emiorapévovs, Xen. Cyr. 
7. 5. 31, and in Latin Grace nescire (Mey., De Wet.). 

V. 38. otk dpa, x. 7. d., Art thou not therefore the Egyptian ? 
i. e. as I supposed. ov indicates an affirmative answer with refer- 
ence to the speaker’s former state of mind. W.§ 61.3. The 
commander, on being addressed in Greek, concludes that he is 
mistaken; for it was notorious (it would seem) that the Egyptian 
was unable to speak that language. He could not have drawn 
that inference solely from his Egyptian origin, for the Greek 
was now spoken more or less in almost every country. —Of this 
Egyptian impostor, Josephus has given two different accounts which 
need to be reconciled with each other, as well as with Luke. In 
his Bell, Jud. 2. 13. 5, he relates that a juggler (yéns), whom he 
also denominates 6 Aiyimris, having procured for himself the repu- 
tation of a prophet, led a great multitude of about thirty thousand 
men out of the desert to the Mount of Olives, and promised them 
that the walls of Jerusalem would fall down at his command; but 
Felix fell upon them, the Egyptian fled per édiyov, with a small 
number, most of his followers were slain or taken prisoners, and 

39 


306 NOTES. [CHAP. XXI. 38. 


the rest of the crowd (r3 ourdy mA7Oos) dispersed. In his Antt. 
20. '7. 6 (he wrote this work later than his Jewish War), he states 
that this Egyptian came to Jerusalem, that he persuaded the popu- 
lace to go out with him to the Mount of Olives, where he would ex- 
hibit to them the wonder before mentioned ; and then he speaks of 
the attack of Felix, and in that connection says merely that four 
hundred of the Egyptian’s people were slain, and two hundred were 
taken captive, without any further addition. ‘ Here now,” says 
Tholuck,* ‘“¢ Josephus has in all appearance contradicted himself in 
the most glaring manner; for in one case the Egyptian brings the 
people from the desert to the Mount of Olives, in the other, from 
Jerusalem; in the one case the greater part of thirty thousand 
people are slain or taken prisoners; in the other, the number of 
the slain amounts to only four hundred, that of the prisoners to only 
two hundred. This example serves to illustrate an important rule 
of criticism, so often violated by sceptical writers in relation to the 
Bible ; and that is, that, if the general credibility of an historian be 
acknowledged, we are bound to reconcile an apparent difference by 
interpretation or combination. The application of this principle 
here enables us to view the matter thus. The man had at first a 
band of sicarii, and a rabble had also attached themselves to him; 
these people he leaves behind on the Mount of Olives, and leads 
thither out of Jerusalem an additional crowd, so that the entire 
multitude might amount to about thirty thousand men. As usually 
happens in such cases, curiosity merely had drawn together most 
of them. Only a smaller company belonged to the train of his fol- 
lowers, and among these were the sicarii ; the attack of the Ro- 
mans was directed properly against these, of whom Felix slew 
four hundred, and made two hundred prisoners. With a small num- 
ber, i. e. with the four thousand of whom Luke speaks, he escaped 
into the desert; the remaining mass, i. e. rd mAnOos, of which the 
first passage of Josephus speaks, dispersed. In this, or in a similar 
way, the Jewish historian may be reconciled with himself, and with 
the writer of the Acts.” — eis ri epnyov, viz. between Egypt and 
Palestine, as he came from that direction. — rods rerpaxioxirious, the 
four thousand. 'The event was so recent that the precise number 
was still known. The same Felix was procurator of Judea at this 
time ; see 23, 24. — orxapiov, assassins, a Latinism. They received 





* Glaubwirdigkeit der Evangelischen Geschichte, p. 169. 





CHAP. XXI. 38— XXII. 1.] NOTES. 307 


their name from the Roman sica,a curved dagger adapted by its 
form to be concealed beneath the clothes; they could use it for 
striking a fatal blow, in a crowd, without being observed. 

V. 39. eyd.... Tapoeds, as analyzed by Meyer, contains two 
clauses: I am indeed (év) not the Egyptian, but a Jew from Tar- 
sus. d€ below can hardly be antithetic. — KiAccias depends on 
médews ; not in apposition with an implied genitive in Tapoeds (Eng. 
vers.). — ov« dojpov, not unnoied ; on the contrary, says Josephus 
(Antt. 1. 6. 1), the most important city of all Cilicia. Many of 
the coins of Tarsus bear the title of Autonomous and Metropolis. 
‘See on 9, 30. ! 

V. 40. Hatdos éords; x... “What nobler spectacle,” ex- 
claims Chrysostom, “than that of Paul at this moment! There 
he stands bound with two chains, ready to make his defence to the 
people. The Roman commander sits by, to enforce order by his 
presence. An enraged populace look up to him from below. Yet 
in the midst of so many dangers, how self-possessed is he, how 
tranquil!” — +9 ‘EBpaidi Siadéxrm, i.e. in the Syro-Chaldaic or 
Aramean, as in John 5,2; 19, 13. See on 6. 1. In that lan- 
guage, if he was not more intelligible to most of them, he could 
at least “‘ speak more directly to the hearts of the people.” 





CHAPTER XXII. 


V. 1-21. Paul’s Speech on the Stairs of the Castle. 


As we examined Luke’s account of Paul’s conversion (9, 1-18) 
in connection with this address, it will be sufficient for the most part 
‘to refer the student to the Notes there, so far as the two narra- 
tives coincide. I subjoin Mr. Humphry’s introductory paragraph. 
_ “ Though the subject-matter of this speech has been related before, 
it assumes here a fresh interest from the manner in which it is 
adapted to the occasion and the audience. The apostle is suspect- 
ed of disaffection to the Mosaic law. In order to refute this charge, 
he addresses them in Hebrew; he dwells on his Jewish education, 
and on his early zeal for the law; he shows how at his conversion 
he was guided by Ananias, a man devout according to the law, and 
of good report among the Jews at Damascus, and how he subse- 


308 i NOTES. _ [emap. xx1..1-5. 


quently wershipped in the temple at Jerusalem. So far they listen 
to him; but he no sooner touches on the promulgation of the gos- 
pel among the heathen (v. 21) than he is interrupted, and his fate 
would probably have been the same as Stephen’s, had he not been 
under the protection of the Roman captain.” 

V. 1. For ddeddot cat marépes, see on 7,2. Here too the Eng- 
lish version represents dvdpes as a distinct class. — pou depends not 
on dkovoare (comp. 1, 4), but on azodoyias. 

V. 8. The common rule would place pev after yeyerynpévos. It 
stands out of its place now and then in the best writers. W. 
§ 65.5. The opposition lies evidently between Paul’s foreign birth 
and his education at Jerusalem. — KaArkias depends not on wéder un- 
derstood, but on Tapoé under the rule of possession. W. § 30. 2. 
— Critics point this sentence differently. Many of the older com- 
mentators, whom Meyer follows, place the comma after Tayahimr, 
instead of ravrn, so as to bring a participle at the head of the sev- 
eral clauses. This division promotes the rhythm at the expense of 
the sense. The comma should be put undoubtedly after rairy 
(Grsb., Lachm., De Wet.). mapa rods odas Tayadupd is appropriate 
to memadevpévos, but not to dvareOpappévos ; the latter having respect 
to his physical growth or progress to manhood, the former to his 
professional training. dvareOpappevos év rH mode tairy forbids the 
supposition that Paul was an adult when he went to reside at Jeru- 
salem. Compare, also, 26, 4. He must have removed thither 
from Tarsus in his boyhood or early -youth. It is surprising that 
Eichhorn and Hemsen should maintain, in opposition to such evi- 
dence, that Paul did not enter the school of Gamaliel until the 
thirtieth yéar of his age.* — To be taught at one’s feet was a pro- 
verbial expression among the Jews, founded on the fact that in their 
schools the teachers, whether they stood or sat, occupied a higher 
place than the pupils. — cod is like the genitive in 21, 20. 

V. 4. radrny riv dddv (19, 23) stands concisely for those of this 
way; comp. 9, 2.— aypu Oavdrov should be understood of the re- 
sult, mot the aim merely (Grot.), of his persecution. The facts 
justify the strongest sense of the expression; see v. 20 and 26, 10. 

V.5. ds xal.... por, as also the high-priest testifies (= is wit- 
ness) for me; i. e. the dpysepeds at that time (see on 9, 1), who was 





* In regard to the probable age of Paul at that time, see Appendix, 
No, 1. 


ee ee 





——— ee a 





CHAP, XXII. 5—13.] NOTES. 309 


known to be still living, Some construe the verb incorrectly as 
future. — mpds rods ddehods = mpos ras ovvaywyas in 9, 2; i. e. unto 
the Jewish rulers of the synagogue whom Paul recognizes as breth- 
ren (as in v. 1), to show that he was not hostile to his country- 
men or alienated from them (21, 28); comp. Rom. 9, 1 sq.— 
éropevouny, was journeying; not went (Eng. vers.).— dgov.... 
&vras, in order to bring also those there, lit. thither, because the 
speaker’s mind passes from where he is to them. — iva tipwpnbdow, 
that they might be punished, viz. by imprisonment (v. 4; 8, 3), by 
stripes (v. 19 ; 26, 11), or by death (v. 4; 8, 1). 

V.6. éyévero, x. r.., But it happened to me as I journeyed (the 
participle as imperfect) that, etc. — po mopevopévm is not an in- 
stance of the dative absolute, but depends on éyévero ; comp. v. 17. 
W.§ 31, R. 3. — epi peonpBpiar. See on 9,3. That he should 
have had such a vision (és ixavdv) at such an hour made it the 
more impossible that he should be deceived. — For mepi in mepia- 
orpdWa repeated before éyé, see on 3, 2. 

V.'7. @reca, which is changed in some copies to érecov, is an 
Alexandrian form; comp. Gal. 5,4. W.§ 18. 1.a.  Transcribers 
have probably altered this termination to the second aorist in some 
other passages, as John 6, 10; Heb. 3,17; Rev. 7,11. For éreoa 
in the classics, see K. § 154, R. 2; B. § 114. 

V. 9. of ody euol dvres = of cvvodedorres are in 9,7 (comp. 26, 
14). So those might be described who were travelling with Saul 
accidentally ; but the common view is more correct, that they are 
the men who accompanied him as his assistants. He would need 
the aid of others to enable him to convey his prisoners in safety to 
Jerusalem (v. 5).— rhy d€ havi od ifeovoay, but the voice of him 
who spoke to me they understood not. For this translation, see the 
remarks on 9, 7. 

V. 11. ds dé odk évéBerov, As now I saw not, i. e. any thing; 
here only without-an object. — amd rijs SdEns rod paris exeivov, from 
the glory, splendor, of that light, which was “ above the brightness 
of the sun’’; see 26, 18. 

V. 12. edcefrs is the authorized word, not edraBis. — xarorkovvrav, 
sc. év Aayackd. — émords, standing near, in order to place his hands 
upon him; comp. 9, 17.— The recapitulation omits here what is 
related in 9, 10-19. 

V. 13. dvdBreov, see again, receive thy sight (9, 12) ; but dva- 
Brewa eis adrév, I looked up upon him. Meyer attaches the latter 
sense to the verb in the first clause. 


310 : NOTES. [CHAP. XXII. 14-17. 


V. 14. mpoexewpicaro, x. 7. d., has appointed (destined, as in 3, 
20) thee to know his will, not as to the way of saving men (i. e. 
Bovdyy in 20, 27), but as to what he was to do and suffer in his 
future sphere of labor ; comp. 9, 15. 16. — kat ideiv. See the last 
remark on 9, 7. — rv Sikaov, as in 3, 14; 7, 52. 

V. 15. 81 %on .... avOpdrous, for thou shalt be a witness for 
him unto all men. This is the reason why Christ had revealed 
himself to Paul; comp. Gal. 1, 16. The idea of our English 
*“‘ martyr’? was not attached to pdaprup or paprus till a later period. 
We see the word in its progress to that signification in v. 20 and 
Rev. 17,6. ‘Towards the close of the second century it had be- 
come so honorable a title, that the Christians at Lyons who had 
been condemned to suffer torture or death, fearful that they might 
waver in the moment of extremity, refused to be called “ martyrs.” 
“This name,” said they, ‘ properly belongs only to the true and 
faithful Witness, the Prince of Life; or, at least, only to those 
whose testimony Christ has sealed by their constancy to the end. 
We are but poor, humble confessors, i. e. 6uddoyo.” (Euseb. Hist. 
5. 2.) — dv instead of d, which the verb requires, arises from the 
suppressed ékeivwy after pdprus. 

V. 16. dvaords stands opposed to pédrets, i. e. without delay; 
see on 9, 18. — Bdarrica, be baptized, or, with a stricter adherence 
to the form, have thyself baptized (De Wet.). One of the uses of 
the middle is to express an act which a person procures another to 
perform for him. This is the only instance in which the verb oc- 
curs in this voice, with reference to christian baptism. — kat dmédov- 
oat Tas duaprias cov, and wash away thy sins. ‘This clause states a 
result of the baptism, in language derived from the nature of that 
ordinance. It answers to «is dpeow dyuapridy in 2, 38, i. e. submit 
to the rite in order to be forgiven. In both passages baptism is 
represented as having this importance or efficacy, because it is the 
sign of the repentance and faith which are the conditions of salva- 
tion. — émixadeoduevos 7d Svoua avrov supplies essentially the place 
of émt r@ dvduatt “Incod Xpiorod in 2, 38; see the Note on that 
clause. od xvpiov after dvoua has much less support than adrod. 
The pronoun can refer only to Christ; comp. on 9, 14. 

V.17. éyévero governs po as in v. 6. — In apocevyouévou pov the , 
construction changes to the genitive absolute. On account of this 
intervening clause, we accompanies yéveoOar, though éyévero has the 
same logical subject (see on 15, 23). W. § 45. 2. — On éxordoe, 


ee ee 





CHAP. XXII. 17—23.] NOTES. 311 


see 10,10. Some, as Schott, Wieseler, and others, would identify 
this ‘¢ ecstasy’ with the vision to which Paul alludes in 2 Cor. 
12, 2; they would establish by this coincidence the date of the 
composition of that Epistle. But as the apostle had so many simi- 
lar revelations in the course of his life, and as the character of this 
vision is so unlike that described in 2 Cor. 12, 2, the conjecture 
that they are the same must be pronounced vague and improbable. 

V. 18. ev rdye accords with Gal. 1,18. It is there stated that 
on this first visit Paul remained at Jerusalem but fifteen days. In 
that passage of the Epistle the apostle says nothing respecting this 
vision in the temple ; but “ omissions are not contradictions, nor is 
silence concerning a fact a denial of it.”” — dire... . wept epod, be- 
cause they (viz. his unconverted countrymen) will not receive thy 
testimony, i. e. although he should continue to declare it to them. 
See the Note on 9, 30. 

V.19. kaye cirov, x. tr. The apostle states the reason here 
why he supposed Jerusalem to be his proper field of labor. His 
history as a converted blasphemer and persecutor was notorious in 
that city ; the testimony of such a man might be expected to have 
more weight among those who had witnessed the change in his 
‘character, than among those to whom his previous life was un- 
known. 

V. 20. pdprupds cov, thy witness, not “ martyr” (Eng. vers.) ; 
see on v. 15.— kai airés, then (see on 1,10) I myself.— In re- 
spect to cvvevdoxdv, see the Note on 8,1. 17 dvaipécee avrod the 
critical editions of the text omit, or put in brackets. It is probably 
an addition from 8, 1. 


V. 22- 29. Paul Aye his Roman Citizenship, and escapes the 
Torture. 


V. 22. dypt rovrov rod Adyov, unto this word, viz. that God 
would send him to the heathen. — For rév with rowdrov, see on 
19, 25. — od yap caOjxer adrov Civ, for it was not fit he should live ; 
imperfect because he had forfeited life long ago. W. § 42. 2. 
Meyer refers the past tense to the chiliarch’s interference: he 
ought not to have rescued the man, but should have left him to his 
fate. Some copyists, not perceiving the force of the imperfect, 
wrote kaOjKov or Kader. 

V. 23. purrotvrov ra iudria means, not throwing off their gar- 
ments as a preparation for stoning Paul (Grot., Mey.), for he was 


312 NOTES. [CHAP. XXII. 23-25. 


now in the custody of the Roman captain ; but throwing them up, 
tossing them about, as a manifestation and an effect of their incon- 
trollable rage. Their casting dust into the air was an act. of the 
same character This mode of demonstrating their feelings was 
suited also to inflame the populace still more, and to impress the 
tribune with the necessity of conceding something to their demands. 
Sir John Chardin, as quoted by Harmer,* says that it is common 
for the peasants in Persia, when they have a complaint to lay be- 
fore their governors, to repair to them by hundreds, or a thousand, 
at once ; they place themselves near the gate of the palace, where 
they suppose they are most likely to be seen and heard, and there 
set up a horrid outcry, rend their garments, and throw dust into the 
air, at the same time demanding justice. 

V. 24. éxéXNevoev, x. r. dX. It is not surprising that the chiliarch 
gave this order. He had been unable to follow Paul’s address on 
account of his ignorance of the language ; and witnessing now this 
renewed outburst of rage, he concludes that the prisoner must have 
given occasion. for it by some flagrant offence, and determines 
therefore to extort a confession from him. — cizav .... avrov, di- 
recting that he should be examined by scourges. ‘The plural refers 
to the blows or lashes of the scourge. It was proposed to torture 
him into an acknowledgment of his supposed crime. — wa émiyvd, 
that he might ascertain. — obras émepavovy avira, were so crying out 
against him ; not cried out (Eng. vers.). 

V. 25. as 8 mpoérewav adrov trois inaow has received two differ- 
ent explanations. Some, as De Wette, Meyer, Robinson, render : 
But as they (sc. the soldiers, see v. 29) stretched him forth for the 
thongs, i. e. for the scourge, which consisted sometimes of two or 
more lashes or cords. ‘They placed the apostle in an upright pos- 
ture, so as to expose him more fully to the blows, or caused him 
to lean forward in order to receive them more effectually. The 
stripes, it will be remembered, were inflicted on the naked back 
(see 16, 22). Others translate, they stretched him forth with 
the thongs, against a block or pillar, i.e. bound him to it with 
them, preparatory to his being scourged. ‘The article in this case 
would designate the thongs as those which it was customary 
to use on such occasions. Bottger,+ who advocates the view 





* Observations, Vol. IV. p. 203. 
+ Schauplatz der Wirksamkeit des Apostels Paulus, p. 84. 





CHAP. XXII. 25-28, | NOTES. 313 


last stated, deduces a strong confirmation of it from y. 29. It 
is said that the chiliarch feared when he ascertained that Paul 
was a Roman citizen, because he had bound him; but that fear 
could not relate to the command in 21, 33, for he kept Paul in 
chains until the next day (v. 30), and Felix left him still in that 
condition at the expiration of his term of office (24, 27). It was 
not contrary to the Roman laws for a magistrate to bind a criminal 
or suspected person for safe-keeping, although he was known to be 
a Roman citizen ; and hence it is difficult to see what can be meant 
by dedexds in v. 29, unless it be the binding connected with the 
scourging to which the commander had ordered Paul to be subject- 
ed. ‘That was an outrage which was not to come near the person 
of a Roman even after condemnation; the infliction of it on the 
part of a judge or magistrate exposed him to the severest penalty. 
Several critics (e. g. Kuin., Olsh.) render mpoéreway, delivered, con- 
signed, i. e. to the scourge, which is too vague for so specific a 
term. — mpds tov éorara éxardvtapxov, unto the centurion who was 
standing by, having charge of the inquisition. It was the custom 
of the Romans to commit the execution of such punishments to that 
class of officers; comp. Mark 15, 39.— Kai dxardxpurov, and (that 
too) uncondemned, without previous trial; see on 16, 37. 

V. 26. dpa, rendered take heed in the English version, Gries- 
bach and others omit, after decisive authorities. It was added ap- 
parently to give more point to the caution. —é yap, x. r. X., for this 
man isa Roman. It may excite surprise that the centurion be- 
lieved Paul’s word so readily. We have the explanation of this in 
the fact, that a false claim of this nature was easily exposed, and 
liable to be punished with death. (Suet. Claud. c. 25.) It was 
almost an unprecedented thing that any one was so foolhardy as to 
assert the privilege without being entitled to it. 

V. 27. éye por, x. 7. A. He asks the question, not from any 
doubt of Paul’s veracity, but in order to have the report confirmed 
from his own lips, and at the same time to elicit an explanation of 
so unexpected a fact. The inquiry indicates his surprise that a 
man in Paul’s situation should possess a privilege which he himself 
had procured at such expense. 

V.28. moddod kehadaiov, for a great sum. It has been inferred 
from this circumstance, and from his name, that Lysias was a 
Greek. It was very common under the emperors to obtain the 
rights of citizenship in this way. Havercamp says in a note on 

40 


314 NOTES. [CHAP. XXII. 28, 29. 


Josephus (Antt. 1. p. 712), that a great many Jews in Asia Minor 
were Roman citizens at this time, who had purchased that rank. 
It did not always require great wealth to procure it. A few years 
earlier than this, in the reign of Claudius, “the rights of Roman 
citizenship were sold by Messallina and the freedmen, with shame- 
less indifference, to any purchaser, and it was currently said that the 
Roman civitas might be purchased for two cracked drinking-cups.” 
— yeyévnpat, 8c. ‘Popatos, i. e. he had inherited his rights as a Ro- 
man citizen. In what way the family of Paul acquired this dis- 
tinction is unknown. Many of the older commentators assert that 
Tarsus enjoyed the full privileges of citizenship, and that Paul pos- 
sessed them as a native of Tarsus. But that opinion (advanced 
still in some recent works) is certainly erroneous. The passages 
in the ancient writers which were supposed to confirm it are 
found to be inconclusive; they prove that the Romans freed the in- 
habitants of Tarsus from taxation, allowed them to use their own 
laws, and declared their city the metropolis’ of Cilicia; but they 
afford no proof that the Romans conferred on them the birthright 
of Roman citizenship. Indeed, the opinion to that effect, could it 
be established, so far from supporting Luke’s credibility, would 
bring it into question ; for it is difficult to believe that the chiliarch, 
after being told that Paul was a citizen of Tarsus (21, 39), would 
have ordered him to be scourged, without any further inquiry as to 
his rank. It only remains, therefore, that Paul’s father, or some 
one of his ancestors, must have obtained Roman citizenship in 
some one of the different ways in which foreigners could obtain 
that privilege. It was conferred often as a reward for fidelity to 
the Roman interest, or for distinguished military services; it could 
be purchased, as was mentioned above; or it could be acquired 
by manumission, which, when executed with certain forms, se- 
cured the full immunities of freedom to the emancipated. In 
which of these modes the family of Paul became free can only 
be conjectured. Some adopt one supposition, some another. 
Nothing is certain beyond the fact that Paul inherited his citi- 
zenship. 

V.29. of péAdXovres are the soldiers who aided the centurion 
(v. 25). Luke does not mention the command of Lysias, which 
caused them to desist so promptly. — emvyvods drt “Papatos ert, hav- 
ing ascertained that he is a Roman. ‘Illa vox et imploratio, 
‘Civis Romanus sum,’ que sepe multis, in ultimis terris, opem 


ee a? 


CHAP. XXII. 29— XXIII. 2.] NOTES. 315 


inter barbaros et salutem tulit,”* proved itself effectual, also, in 
this instance. — éri.... dedexas, because he had bound him. ‘Those 
who understand this of his having ordered him to be chained in 
21, 33, must suppose that his present fear was very transient. 
édvoev in v. 80 shows that Paul was kept in chains during the 
night. 


V. 30. Paul is sent for Examination to the Sanhedrim. 


For the use of ré before the interrogative clause, see on 4, 21. 
— ri karnyopeirat mapa Tay "lovdalov, why he is accused on the part of 
the Jews, not directly or formally, but, in point of fact, by their 
persecution of him, their clamor for his death. apd is a more ex- 
act preposition for this sense (W. § 51, s. v.) than imo, which has 
taken its place in some manuscripts. Some have joined mapa ray 
*Iovdaioy with yvavar rd dodadés, as if it could not follow a passive 
verb. — aro ray Secpay after ¢Avoev expands the idea, and was add- 
ed to the text probably for that purpose. It is destitute of critical 
support. — karayayey tov Taddov, having brought down Paul from 
the castle (see on 21, 31) to their place of session in the temple ; 
comp, on 6, 13. : 





CHAPTER XXIIL 


V.1-10. Paul’s Speech before the Jewish Council. 


V. 1. wdon ovverdioe dyaby, with all good conscience, or, better, 
consciousness, i. e. of integrity and sincerity. — memoXirevpa TO ed, 
I have lived unto God, i. e. for his service and glory ; dative of the 
object (see Rom. 14,8; Gal. 2,19). The verb refers to his con- 
duct in all respects ; not specially to his political or civil relations. 
Compare afias rod evayyeAiov modtreveode in Phil. 1, 27. — aps tavrys 
Tis }epas, i. e. since he became a Christian. He had no occasion 
to extend the remark beyond that time, though, in a certain sense, 
he could affirm it of his earlier life (see 26, 9). 

V.2. 6 dpxuepeds “Avavias. This Ananias is to be distinguished 
from the Annas, or Ananus, of whom we read in'4,6; Luke 





* Cic. in Verr. Act. 2. 5. 57. 


316 NOTES. [CHAP. XXIII. 2, 3. 


3, 2, and John 18,13. He is unquestionably, says Winer, the son 
of Nebedeus, who obtained the office of high-priest under the 
procurator Tiberius Alexander, in the year A. D. 48, and was the 
immediate successor of Camydus or Camithus (Jos. Antt. 20. 
5.2). He filled this office also under the procurator Cumanus, but, 
having been implicated in a dispute between the Jews and the 
Samaritans, he was sent by the Syrian propretor to Rome, in A. D. 
52, in order to defend himself before the Emperor Claudius. The 
subsequent history of Ananias is obscure. He either lost his office 
in consequence of this journey, or, which is more probable (Jos. 
Antt. 20. 6. 3), he was acquitted, and continued to officiate as high- 
priest until he was superseded by Ismael, son of Phabi, just before 
the departure of Felix from Judea. In the latter case, says the 
same writer, he was the actual high-priest at the time of the oc- 
currence related here, and is called dpyzepeds on that account, and 
not because he had formerly held the office, or because he occupied 
it during a vacancy. — rois mapeotaow aire, those who stood near 
to him; not members of the council, or spectators, but the drnpéras, 
the servants in attendance; see on 4, 1. — rimrew adrod ro oropa. 
The mouth must be shut that uttered sucha declaration. It was 
not to be tolerated that a man who stood arraigned there as an apos- 
tate from the religion of his fathers should assert his innocence. 
This mode of enjoining silence is practised in the East at the pres- 
ent day. ‘As soon as the ambassador came,” says a traveller in 
Persia, “‘ he punished the principal offenders by causing them to be 
beaten before him; and those who had spoken their minds too free- 
ly, he smote upon the mouth with a shoe.” He relates another in- 
stance: ‘Call the Ferasches,’ exclaimed the king; ‘let them 
beat the culprits until they die.” The Ferasches appeared and beat 
them violently ; and when they attempted to say any thing in their 
defence, they were struck on the mouth.” * 

V. 3. rimrew....6 Oeds, God shall smite thee. The apostle 
does not imprecate vengeance on him, or predict that he would die 
by violence, but declares, in terms corresponding with the nature of 
the outrage, that God would punish him for the act. As Ananias 
was killed by an assassin (Jos. Bell. Jud. 2. 17. 9), some have sup- 
posed Paul’s language to prefigure such an end. — roiye kexovtapeve, 
thou whited wall, i. e. hypocrite, because, as stated in the next 





* Morier’s Second Journey through Persia, pp. 8, 94, 


CHAP. XXIII. 3—6.] NOTES. 317 


clause, he did one thing while he professed another. For the origin 
of the expression, see Matt. 23, 27. The Jews painted their sepul- 
chres white, so as not to defile themselves by coming unexpectedly 
in contact with them ; hence they were fair to the eye while they 
were full of inward corruption. Jahn’s Archeol. § 207.— kai od 
xd6n, And dost thou sit ? etc. «ai conforms here to its use in ques- 
tions designed to bring out the inconsistency of another’s views or 
conduct. Compare Mark 4, 18; Luke 10,29. K. § 321,R. 1. 
— kpivoy pe kara Tov vopov states what was true of him in theory, 
mapavouav What was true in point of fact. 

V.5. ov« dev, I did not know at the moment, i. e. consider 
(Bng., Wetst., Kuin., Olsh.). Compare the use of this verb in Eph. 
6,8; Col. 3,24. Some understand that Paul did not know, was 
ignorant, that Ananias was now the high-priest ; a possible igno- 
rance, certainly, since he had been absent from the country so long, 
and the high-priest was changed so frequently at that period. But 
this view is liable to another objection; it renders the apostle’s 
apology for his remark irrelevant, since he must have perceived 
from the presence of Ananias that he was at least one of the rulers 
of the people, and entitled to respect on account of his station. — 
yap yéyparra: connects itself with an implied thought: Otherwise I 
should not have so spoken ; for it is written, viz. in Ex. 22, 28. 
The passage applies to any civil magistrate, as well as to the high- 
priest. Paul admits that he had been thrown off his guard; the 
insult had touched him to the quick, and he had spoken rashly. But 
what can surpass the grace with which he recovered his self-pos- 
session, the frankness with which he acknowledged his error? If 
his conduct in yielding to the momentary impulse was not that of . 
Christ himself under a similar provocation (John 18, 22. 23), cer- 
tainly the manner in which he atoned for his fault was Christ-like. 

V.6. yrods dé, x. 7. X. “In order to secure the voice of the 
majority among his judges, he availed himself of a measure for 
promoting the triumph of the truth which has been oftener em- 
ployed against it, — the divide et impera in a good sense ; in order 
to produce a division in the assembly, he addressed himself to the 
interest for the truth which a great part of his judges acknowl- 
edged, and by which they really approached nearer to him than 
the smaller number of those who denied it. He could say with 
truth that he stood there on trial because he had testified of the 
hope of Israel, and of the resurrection of the dead; for he had 


318 NOTES. [ CHAP. XXIII. 6-9. 


preached Jesus as the one through whom this hope was to be ful- 
filled. ‘This declaration had the effect of uniting the Pharisees 
present in his favor, and of involving them in a violent dispute with 
the Sadducees. The former could find no fault with him. If he 
said that the spirit of a deceased person, or that an angel, had ap- 
peared to him, no one could impute that to him as a crime; 
what he meant by this, and whether what he alleged was true or 
not, they did not trouble themselves to decide.” (Neand.) — wept 
emidos, k. tT. A., for hope’s sake and (that) a resurrection of the 
dead (Mey., De Wet.) ; or, by hendiadys, the hope of the resurrec- 
tion (Kuin., Olsh.). The first mode of stating it analyzes the 
grammatical figure. 

V. 8. py elvar.... wvedpa, that there is no resurrection, nor 
angel or spirit. nde adds a second denial to the first, while pyre 
expands this denial into its parts. See W.§ 59.8. Josephus con- 
firms this statement as to the belief of the Sadducees. In one place 
(Bell. Jud. 2. 8. 14) he says, that ‘* the Sadducees reject the perma- 
nence or existence of the soul after death, and the rewards and 
punishments of an invisible world”; and in another place (Antt. 
18. 1. 4), that “ the Sadducees hold that the souls of men perish with 
their bodies.” The Talmudists and other Jewish writers make the 
same representation. — 7rd duddrepa, both, i. e. according to the 
above analysis, a resurrection and the reality of spiritual existences, 
whether angels or the souls of the departed. Josephus belonged 
to the sect of the Pharisees, and he represents their opinion to have 
been, “ that souls have an immortal vigor, and are destined to be re- 
warded or punished in another state according to the life here, as it 
has been one of virtue or vice ; that the good will be permitted to 
live again (i. e. in another body on the earth), and that the wicked 
will be consigned to an eternal prison.” (Antt. 18. 1.3.) “ There 
was a variety of opinions concerning the resurrection,” says Biscoe, 
‘among the Pharisees, or traditionary Jews. In this account of 
it, which resembles the heathen idea of transmigration, Josephus, 
as I apprehend, has given us that which comes nearest to his own 
belief, or which he was inclined to have the Greek philosophers un- 
derstand to be his own. For he is accused by learned men, and 
certainly not without reason, of sometimes accommodating the Jew- 
ish revelation to the sentiments of the heathen, or bringing it as 
near to what was taught by them as might be.” 

V. 9. of ypappareis, x... d., the scribes of the party of the 


CHAP. XXIII. 9-15.] NOTES. 319 


Pharisees contended, disputed violently. They appear as the 
champions of their party, because they were the men of learning, 
and accustomed to such debates. — «i 5€ mvedua, x. tr. d., but if a 
spirit has spoken to him, or an angel ; undoubtedly, a designed 
aposiopesis. A significant gesture or look towards the Sadducees 
expressed what was left unsaid: that is not an impossible thing, the 
matter then assumes importance, or something to that effect. See 
W. § 66. II. Some maintain that the sentence is incomplete, be- 
cause the remainder was unheard amid the tumult that now ensued. 
The common text supplies 1) Gcopayaper as the apodosis ; but the 
testimonies require us to reject that addition. It was suggested, 
probably, by dcoudya: in 5, 39. 

V.10. pa Siacrac6j 6 Taddos in’ airayv, lest Paul should be 
pulled in pieces by them,as the parties struggled to obtain posses- 
sion of him; their object being on the one side to protect him, and 
on the other to maltreat or kill him. —ré orpdrevpa, the army, the 
military foree stationed in the fortress; see v. 27. 





V. 11-15. <A Conspiracy of the Jews to slay Paul. 


V. 11. 6 képios, i. e. Christ. —Tadre after Odpce (followed in 
the English version) is to be struck out. — eis ‘Iepovoadnp and eis 
‘Pépny involve an ellipsis like that noticed on 8, 40. W. § 54.4. b. 
— dei, is necessary, because such was the purpose of God; comp. 
27, 24. 

V. 12. soujoarres cvotpopiv, having formed a combination 
(Mey., Rob.), which ovvepociay in v. 13 defines more precisely. — 
oi "Iovdaio, the Jews, since this party of them manifested the Jewish 
spirit ; see the last remark on 4, 1. wes rév "Iovdaiwy is an unap- 
proved reading. 

V. 14. ois dpyiepetor kal rois mpeoBurépos, i. e. those of these 
classes who were hostile to Paul, the Sadducee members of the 
council (Mey., De Wet.). This limitation suggests itself without 
remark, after the occurrencewhich has just been related. — dvee- 
paricauev éavrovs, we have cursed ourselves. The reflexive of the 
third person (see v. 12) may follow a subject of the first or second 
person. K. § 303. 8; B. § 127, n. 5. 

V. 15. otv rG curedpio, i. e. in the name of that body, as if it 
was their united request. —avpuov has been added to the text in 
some copies, because it occurs in v. 20. — dkpiBeorepov, more exact- 
ly than on the former trial. — mpd rot eyyioa avrov, before he has 


320 NOTES. [CHAP. XXIII. 15, 16. 


come near, i. e. to the place of assembly. Their plan was to kill 
him on the way; see v. 21. —rovd dvedeiv depends on éromo as a 
genitive construction, W. § 45. 4. 

It would be difficult to credit the account of such a proceeding 
as we have now read, had Luke related it of any other people than 
the Jews. Here, as Lardner* suggests, are more than forty men 
who enter into a conspiracy to take away Paul’s life in a clandestine 
manner ; and they make no scruple to declare it to the council, re- 
lying upon their approbation. It is clearly implied that these teach- 
ers of religion, these professed guardians of the law, gave their 
assent to the proposal; they had nothing to object, either to so in- 
famous a design, or to the use of such means for accomplishing it. 
But, out of place as such a passage would be in any other history, 
it relates a transaction in perfect harmony with the Jewish opinions 
and practices of that age. A single testimony will illustrate this. 
Philo, in speaking of the course to be pursued towards a Jew who 
forsakes the worship of the true God, lays down the following prin- 
ciple : “ It is highly proper that all who have a zeal for virtue should 
have a right to punish with their own hands, without delay, those 
who are guilty of this crimé ; not carrying them before a court of 
judicature, or the council, or, in short, before any magistrate ; but 
they should indulge the abhorrence of evil, the love of God, which 
they entertain, by inflicting immediate punishment on such impious 
apostates, regarding themselves for the time as all things, senators, 
judges, pretors, sergeants, accusers, witnesses, the laws, the people ; 
so that, hindered by nothing, they may without fear, and with all 
promptitude, espouse the cause of piety.” Josephus mentions a 
similar combination against the life of Herod into which a party of 
the Jews entered on account of the religious innoyations which 
they charged him with introducing. (Antt. 15. 8. 1-4.) 


V. 16-22. The Plot is disclosed to the Roman Commander. 


V.16. 6 vids ris ddeApijs. Whether the family of this sister re- 
sided at Jerusalem, or the nephew only, does not appear from the 
narrative. His anxiety for the safety of Paul may have arisen from 
a stronger interest than that prompted by their relationship to each 
other. See the Note on 9, 30. — riv évédpay, the ambush intended, 
the plot. 





* Credibility of the Gospel History, Vol. I. p. 224. 





CHAP. XXIII. 18—24.] NOTES. 321 


V. 18. 6 Sécpwos shows that Paul was still bound, i. e. by a 
chain to the arm of a soldier. — éyovrd tt Aadjoai cor, since he has 
something to say to thee; comp. €xet yap, x. tr. A., in v, 17. 

V. 21. évedpevover, lie in wait, plot against him; comp. évédpay 
mo.ovvres in 25, 3. — recoapdkovra, sc. dvdpoy, as in v. 13. — éroipoi 
cigt, SC. Tod dvedeiv adrov; Comp. V. 15.— mpoadexdpevor thy ard cod 
érayyeriav, awaiting the (expected) promise from thee. énayyehia 
has this constant sense in the New Testament. 

V. 22. Note the change to the direct style in érc ratra évedvioas 
mpos pe. W. § 64. III. 1. Compare Luke 5,14. The opposite 
change occurs in v. 24. 


V. 23-30. The Letter of Lysias to Feliz. 


_ V. 23. 8v0 rwas rév éxarovrdpyov, some two (two or three) of the 
centurions ; comp. dvo twas trav pabyrdy in Luke 7,19. ris joined 
with numerals renders them indefinite. W. § 25. 2. b; K. 
— § 303. 4.—orparirus, soldiers, who, as they are distinguished from 
the other two classes named, must be the ordinary, heavy-armed 
' legionaries. — d<£voAdBovs occurs only here and in two obscure writ- 
ers of the iron age. ‘Its meaning is a riddle.” (De Wet.) The 
proposed explanations are these: mapadvaakes, military lictors who 
guarded prisoners, so called from their taking the right-hand side 
(Suid., Bez., Kuin.); dancers (Vulg., Eng. vers.) ; a species of 
light-armed troops (Mey.), since they are mentioned once in con- 
nection with archers and peltasts. Codex A reads de£oBddous, 
jaculantes dextra (Syr.).— dw tpirns Spas, from the third hour, 
i. e. nine o’clock with us; it being implied that they were to march 
at that hour as well as be ready. 

V. 24. «rin re wapaotijca, and that they should provide beasts 
of burden, as two or more would be needed for relays, or for the 
transportation of baggage. The discourse changes at this point 
from the direct to the indirect ; comp. on 19, 27. — iva émiBiBdoar- 
res, k. T. X., that having mounted Paul (on one of them) they might 
convey him in safety unto Felix. 64 in the verb refers to the in- 
termediate space, not to the dangers through which they were to 
pass ; comp. 27, 44; 1 Pet. 3, 20. — Felix was the procurator of 
Judea, having received this office from the Emperor Claudius, prob- 
ably in the autumn of A. D. 52 (Win., Ang., Mey.). He was 
originally a slave, was a man of energy and talents, but avari- 
cious, cruel, and profligate. ‘Tacitus (Hist. 5. 9) has drawn his 

41 


322 NOTES. [CHAP. XXIII. 24-30. 


character in a single line: *“* Per omnem seevitiam ac libidinem jus 
regium servili ingenio exercuit.” See further on 24, 3. 24. 

V. 25. ypdyas belongs to the subject of cimev in v. 23. — mepie- 
xoveay Tov TUmov TovTov, containing this outline, draught, i. e. a let- 
ter to this effect. ‘The Roman law required that a subordinate offi- 
cer, in sending a prisoner to the proper magistrate for trial, should 
draw up a written statement of the case. The technical name of 
such a communication was elogium. 

V. 26. xparicrg is an honorary epithet; see on 1, 1. — jyepou 
stands in the New Testament for the more specific émizpomos (comp. 
Matt. 27, 2). — yaipew. Compare the last remark on 15, 23. 

V.27. ov dvdpa is the object of e&eAdpunv, which airoy repeats 
on account of the distance of the noun from the verb; comp. rov- 
tov in 1, 22.— otv ro otparedpari, with the military (see v. 10). — 
paboy ort ‘Pwpaics éort, having learned that he is a Roman, which 
is stated as a reason why he was so prompt to rescue him. It was 
not until after he had taken Paul into his custody that he ascertained 
his rank ; but, as was not unnatural, he wished to gain as much 
credit as possible in the eyes of his superior. This deviation from 
truth, says Meyer, testifies to the genuineness of the letter. Some 
resolve paboy into kai guabov, as if he discovered that Paul was a 
Roman citizen after his apprehension. The Greek of the New 
Testament affords no instance of such a use of the participle. See 
W. § 46. 2. é 

V. 29. mept Cyrnudrav Tov vouov adirav. See the Note on 18, 15. 
— As Oavarov and decpdy denoted the highest and lowest penalties 
of the law, the idea is that Paul had committed no crime that re- 
quired his detention or punishment (Bottg.). 

V. 30. The writer falls out of his construction here. He says 
pnvubeions at the beginning of the sentence, as if he would have 
added ris peAXovons; but in the progress of the thought adds 
perrgegw, as if he had commenced with pyvvcavrev .... émBovdjy, 
x. tr. 4. The idea of the thing disclosed gives place to that of the 
persons who disclose it. W. § 64. Il. — ind ray “Iovdaioy after éce- 
oa the recent editors omit (Tschdf., De Wet., Mey.). — erepwa, I 
have sent; since the future act would be past on the reception of 
the letter (comp. Phil. 2,28; Philem. 11), W. § 41. 5.2. — én 
aod, before thee. 


CHAP. XXIII. 31.] NOTES. 323 


V. 31-35. Paul is sent to Felix at Cesarea. 


V. 31. dvadaBdrres answers to émiBiBaoavres in v. 24. — dia tips 
vuxrés, during the night, which included the hours from nine o’clock, 
P. M. (v. 23) to six, A. M.—eis ri *Avtiumarpisa. Antipatris was 
about thirty-eight miles from Jerusalem, on the route to Cesarea. 
It was built by Herod the Great, on the site of a place called Caphar 
Saba, and was named by him Antipatris, in honor of his father 
Antipater. Its precise situation has not been fixed with certainty ; 
but it is to be placed probably near the modern Kefr Saba.* — As 
those who conducted Paul had a good road (traces of the old Roman 
pavement are still visible), they could possibly travel from Jerusa- 
lem to Antipatris, by a forced march, in nine hours. It would have 
required about four miles an hour to perform the journey in that time. 
Strabo says that an army, under ordmary circumstances, could march 
from two hundred and fifty to three hundred stadia in a day. This 
may be one of the highest estimates ; one of the lowest would be two 
hundred stadia (Forbg. Hand. I. p. 551). Some understand #ya- 
you Sia Ths vukros to mean that they brought him by night, in distinc- 
tion from the day ; in which case they could have occupied two nights 
on the road. It is suggested that the escort may have proceeded to 
Nicopolis the first night, which was twenty-two Roman miles from 
Jerusalem, and, remaining there the next day, have arrived at Anti- 
patris the night following. Biscoe, Meyer,+ Kuinoel, and others, 
adopt this opinion. In this case rp émavpiov in v. 32 must denote the 





* This is the opinion of the Rev. Eli Smith, a missionary in Syria. See 
his narrative of a visit to Antipatris, in the Bibliotheca Sacra, 1843, p. 478 
sq. He gives the following description of the present Kefr Saba. “Itisa 
Muslim village, of considerable size, and wholly like the most common vil- 
lages of the plain, being built entirely of mud. We saw but one stone 
building, which was apparently a mosque, but without a minaret. No old 
ruins, nor the least relic of antiquity, did we anywhere discover. A well 
by which we stopped, a few rods east of the houses, exhibits more signs of 
careful workmanship than any thing else. It is walled with hewn stone, 
and is fifty-seven feet deep to the water. The village stands upon a slight 
circular eminence, near the western hills, from which it is actually sepa- 
rated, however, by a branch of the plain.”” Raumer (Palastina, p. 132, 3d 
ed.) supposes Antipatris to have been at this place. 

t J. A. G. Meyer in his Versuch einer Vertheidigung und Erlauterung 
der Geschichte Jesu und der Apostel aus Griechischen und Rémischen 
Profanscribenten (p. 461), 


324 | NOTES. [cCHAP. XXIII. 31-35. 


morrow after the arrival at Antipatris on the second night, instead 
of the morrow after leaving Jerusalem, as the text would more ob- 
viously suggest. But it may be better still to consider 8a rijs vuxrds 
as applying only to the greater part of the journey. It would be 
correct to speak of it, in general terms, as a journey by night, al- 
though it occupied two or three hours of the following day. This 
view, which Winer maintains (Realw. I. p. 65), allows us to assign 
twelve hours to the march, which would be sufficient. Finally, it 
remains possible that the site of Antipatris has not been identified. 
It may have been nearer to Jerusalem than we have supposed in 
the foregoing remarks. Some would look for the spot at the mod- 
ern Mejdel Yaba; and if this was the place, the journey would 
have been thirty miles, instead of thirty-eight. 

V. 32. édoavres, x. tA. The remaining distance to Cesarea 
was not more than twenty-five miles. ‘They were now so far from 
the scene of danger that. they could with safety reduce the escort. 
They commenced their return to Jerusalem on the morrow, but 
need not be supposed to have arrived on that day. 

V.34. 6 jryeuev appears in the common text, without sufficient 
reason. — émeporjoas, kx. Tt. d., having asked from what province he 
is. He makes the inquiry, perhaps, because the letter stated that 
Paul was a Roman citizen. 

V. 35. diaxodcouai cov, I will hear thee fully. Observe the 
compound. ‘The expression exhibits a singular conformity to the 
processes of Roman law. The rule was, Qui cum elogio (see on 
v. 25) mitiuntur, ex integro audiendi sunt. The governor of a 
province was not to give implicit credit to the document with which 
a prisoner was sent to him; he must institute an independent exami- 
nation of the case for himself.* — ev 7 mpartwpie rod “Hpadov, in the 
pretorium of Herod, i.e. in the palace built by him at Cesarea, 
and now occupied as the residence of the Roman procurators. 
Paul was confined in some apartment of this edifice, or within its 
precincts. 





* Bottger, Beitrage zur kritischer Einleitung in die Paulinischen Briefe, 
Part II. p. 8. 


CHAP. XXIV. 1-3.] NOTES. 325 


CHAPTER XXIV. 


V.1-9. Tertullus accuses Paul before Felix. 


V. 1. pera d€ révre qyepas, Now after five days, i. e., in popular 
usage, on the fifth since Paul’s departure from Jerusalem (Kuin., 
Mey., De Wet.) ; not since his capture there, or since his arrival at 
Cesarea. We are to prefer the briefer interval, because the Ro- 
man law required cases to be heard with as little delay as possible. 
Another reason for this decision arises from v. 11. — pera rév mpeo- 
Burépwv, with the elders, i. e. the Sanhedrists, represented by some 
of their number. twdév is a gloss. — fyropos TeprvAXov. As the 
people in the provinces were not acquainted with the forms of Ro- 
man law, they employed advocates to plead for them before the pub- 
lic tribunals. Tertullus was one of this class of men, and may 
have been a Roman or a Greek. 

V.2.. #pEaro xarnyopeiv, proceeded to accuse. ‘'Tertullus insisted 
on three charges ; viz. sedition (xwodvra ordow), heresy (mpwrocrdrny 
tév Na{wpaiey), and profanation of the temple (és kal, x. 7. X.) ; see 
w. 5, 6. 

V. 3. In this verse the participial clause forms the object of dzo- 
dexoueOa 3 Comp. evxapioTd TH OG mavrav bpav paddov yrdbooas hadrav 
in 1 Cor. 14,18. W.§46.1.a. Translate, That we enjoy much 
peace through thee, and (the benefit of) many (sc. wodddv) excellent 
deeds performed for this nation by thy prudence, we accept, ac- 
knowledge, with all gratitude. Most critics transfer the idea of 
modAjs to karopbapdrov (De Wet., Mey., Rob.), which term refers to 
the general measures of his administration. The speaker employs 
the first person plural, because he identifies himself with his clients. 
— mévtn te kai mayraxod some join with ywopéver: both in every way 
and everywhere (Rob.) ; others with dmodeydueba, and render, both 
always and everywhere; not merely now and here (De Wet., 
Mey.). ‘The first is the surer sense of rdvrn. The best editors 
write this word without iota subscript. W. § 5. 4. e. — The lan- 
guage of Tertullus is that of gross flattery. History ascribes to 
Felix a very different character. Both Josephus and Tacitus rep- 
resent him as one of the most corrupt and oppressive rulers ever 
sent by the Romans into Judea. He deserved some praise for the 
vigor with which he suppressed the bands of robbers by which the 


326 NOTES. [cHAP. XXIV. 3-8. 


country had been infested. ‘The compliment had that basis, but no 
more. : 

V.4. wa.... éyxdrto, But that I may not hinder, detain, thee 
too long, I will be brief, i.e. in what he proposes to advance ; 
él mAciov refers, not to the few words of his preamble, as if that 
was beginning to be tedious, but to his subsequent plea. — dkodoat 
jpav ovrropas, to hear us briefly, where the adverb qualifies the 
verb. It is unnecessary to supply AeEdvroy after jydr. 

V.5. The sentence is irregular. We should have expected 
exparnoapev avrov at the beginning of the apodosis; but instead of 
that the writer says dy kai, influenced apparently by 6s kai in the 
clause which precedes. W. § 46. 2.— ydp, namely: the case is 
as follows (comp. 1, 20). — Aomédv, pest, like our use of the word. 
— kwodvra .... Iovdaious, exciting disturbance unto all the Jews, 
i.e. among them and to their detriment. The latter idea occasions 
the use of the dative. The charge is, that he set the Jews at vari- 
ance with one another; not that he excited them to rebel against 
the Romans. — Nafwpaiwy occurs here only as a term of reproach 
(Olsh.) ; see on 2, 22. 

V. 6. és .... BeByrdou. See 21, 28.— The entire passage 
from kal card to émi oé (v. 6-8) is of doubtful authority. It is res 
jected by Griesbach, Bengel, Mill, Lachmann, Tischendorf, De 
Wette, and others. Manuscripts of the first class omit the words, 
and others contain them with different variations. ‘If they are 
genuine,” says Meyer, ‘it is difficult to see why any one should 
have left them out; for xara rov iypérepov vopov nOeAnoaper Kpivew 
would be no more offensive in the mouth of the advocate who 
speaks in the name of his client, than the preceding éxparjoaper. 
The indirect complaint against Lysias in v. 7 was entirely natural 
to the relation of the Jews to this tribune, who had twice protected 
Paul against them.” — 7OeAncaper kpivew. We obtain a very dif- 
ferent view of their design from 21,31; 26, 21. 

V. 7. In pera moddjs Bias Tertullus misstates the fact. The 
Jews released Paul without any struggle, on the appearance of 
Lysias ; see 21, 32. — émi oé, before thee. 

V. 8. sap’ od would refer to Paul, if we exclude the uncertain 
text which precedes; but more naturally to Lysias, if we retain it 
(comp. v. 22).— dvaxpivas may be used of any judicial examina- 
tion. It is impossible to think here of a trial by torture, since both 
Paul and Lysias were exempt from it as Roman citizens. 








CHAP. XXIV. 9-11.] NOTES. 327 


V.9. cuverébevro, x. r.d., And the Jews also assailed him at the 
same time, viz. by asserting that the charges were true. This is a 


better reading than cuvéOevro, assented, agreed, which we have in 
23, 20. 


V.10-21. Paul’s Defence before Feliz. 


V. 10. ék moddav érdv, since many years. If Felix became pro- 
curator in A. D. 52 (see on v. 24), he had been in office six or 
seven years, which was comparatively a long time. Some of the 
provincial magistrates exceeded that term of service, but a greater 
number of them fell short of it. — xperjv governs @ve: (dat. comm.), 
since the relation existed ideally for their benefit. B.§ 188. 2. h; 
W. § 31.7, R. 2. 

V. 11. Suvapévov cov yava, while you are able to know, i. e. by 
inquiry. He adds this as another reason why he was encour- 
aged to reply. The subject lay within a narrow compass. Felix 
could easily ascertain how Paul had been occupied during the time 
‘In which the crimes were said to have been committed.— The 
common text inserts # before Sexadvo, which the later editions omit. 
See on 4, 22. The best mode of reckoning the twelve days is the 
following: First, the day of the arrival at Jerusalem (21, 17); 
second, the interview with James (21, 18); third, the assumption 
of the vow (21, 26); fourth, fifth, sixth, and seventh, the vow con- 
tinued, which was to have been kept seven days (being interrupted 
on the fifth); eighth, Paul before the Sanhedrim (22, 30; 23, 
1-10); ninth, the plot of the Jews and the journey by night to 
Antipatris (23, 12. 31) ; tenth, eleventh, twelfth, and thirteenth, the 
days at Cesarea (24, 1), on the last of which the trial was then 
taking place. The number of complete days, therefore, would be 
twelve ; the day in progress at the time of speaking is not count- 
ed. The five days mentioned in v. 1 agree with this computation, 
if, according to the suggestion there, we reckon the day of leaving 
Jerusalem as the first of the five, and that of the arrival at Ceesarea as 
the last. . So Wetstein, Anger, Meyer, De Wette, and others. The 
first two deviate slightly from this arrangement. Some,as Kuinoel, 
Olshausen, would exclude the days spent at Cesarea, and extend 
the time assigned to the continuation of the vow. But eit yor (note 
the tense) evidently represents the days as reaching up to the pres- 
ent time.* — dd’ js is abbreviated for did ris jpépas fis. — mpookurh- 





* According to Wieseler’s hypothesis, that Paul was apprehended on the 


328 NOTES. [ CHAP. XXIV. 11-17. 


cov, in order to worship, i. e. in the temple; which was an object 
entirely different from that imputed to him. For this use of the 
future participle, see B. § 144. 3. 

V. 14. The apostle has just replied to the charge of se diiells : 
he passes now to that of heresy. — dre kara ri 68dv, x. 7. d., that 
according to the way (9,2; 19,9, etc.) which (not in which) they 
call a sect, so (i. e. in their mode) I worship, ete. Some critics 
-(Mey., De Wet.) refer otra to moredor: $0, viz. by sei all 
things, etc. 

V. 15. @qida.... Ocdv, having a hope in reference to God, i. e. 
founded on his promise and power. — jv kal, x. 7. A., which also 
these themselves (the Jews present) entertain, that there is appointed 
to be (see on 10, 28) a resurrection of the dead, etc. ‘The apostle 
represents this hope as the prevalent Jewish faith. Compare 26, 7. 
*¢ The Sadducees,” says Biscoe, ‘* were so few in number, that they 
were not worthy of his notice by way of exception. Josephus ex- 
pressly tells us, ‘ that they were a few men only of the chief of the 
nation’ (Antt. 18. 1. 4); that they prevailed only with the rich to 
embrace their sentiments, and that the common people were all on 
the side of the Pharisees (Ib. 13. 10. 6).” 

V. 16. év rovrm, therefore (comp. John 16,30), i. e. in anticipa- 
tion of such a day. — kai airés, I myself also, as well as others. 
It is impossible, the apostle would argue, that he should entertain 
such a persuasion, and yet be guilty of the crimes imputed to him. 

V.17. 8 érév mredver, after several years, i.e. of absence. 
It was now A. D. 58 or 59. He had made his last visit to Jeru- 
salem in the year 54 or 55. — éedXenyootvas roocer, in order to 
bring alms which he had collected in the churches of Macedonia 
and Achaia, for the relief of the believers at Jerusalem ; see Rom. 
15, 25. 26; 1 Cor. 16,1-4; 2 Cor. 8, 1-4. This allusion is 
very abrupt. It is the first and only intimation contained in the 
Acts, that Paul had been taking up contributions on so extensive a 
plan. The manner in which the Epistles supply this deficiency, 





second day of the vow, the ai émrd jepat in 21, 27 form no part of the series. 
He distributes the time as follows: two days on the journey from Cesarea 
to Jerusalem (21, 15) ; third, interview with James; fourth (zevrnkoorn), 
seizure of Paul in the temple; fifth, the session of the Sanhedrim ; sixth, the 
departure by night to Cesarea; seventh, the arrival at Cesarea; twelfth, 
(five days after that), the journey of Ananias from Jerusalem (24, 1); and 
thirteenth, his arrival at Cesarea, and the trial of Paul. 





. 

: 
. 
. 





CHAP, XXIV. 17-22. | NOTES. 329 


as Paley has shown, furnishes an incontestable proof of the credi- 
bility of the New Testament writers. — mpooopas depends loosely 
on romoov: and I was there making, or would have made, offer- 
ings, viz. those connected with the vow (21, 26), as is evident from 
the next verse. 

V. 18. ev ois edpov, x. rt. d., in which, i. e. in prosecution of 
which object (comp. 26, 12), they, sc. the Jews, found me puri- 
fied, etc. — rwes S€ and rijs *Acias "Iov8aior, but certain Jews from 
Asia ; they excited a tumult, not I, as my accusers allege. 
The verb is wanting. The tenor of the narrative must suggest the 
idea to be supplied. The obscurity is the less, as the details of the 
affair have been so fully related (21,27). The common text omits 
dé and makes rwes the subject of edpov. This is incorrect, as 5¢ must 
be retained. Our English translation is founded on the omission of 
this particle. 

V. 20. 4 avrot obra, or (in the absence of the proper witnesses) 
let these themselves (v. 1, 15) say what crime they found. The 
common text has ei before ri; if they found any (Eng. vers.) ; but 
ei is unauthorized. 

V.21. 4 wept puas radrns ovis, than (that) concerning this one 
expression, as if dAdo ddixnua had preceded (Mey., De Wet.). — 
is €xpa€a, which I cried; an attracted genitive, not for the dative, 
but the accusative, which this verb may govern as having a kindred 
sense. In Matt. 27, 50, and Mark 1, 26, dov7 denotes the instru- 
ment of speech, not, as here, what was spoken. See W. § 24. 1. 

V. 22. airovs, them, viz. both parties, like ipas just below. — 
dxpiBéorepov eidas ta rept THs 6d00, knowing the things in regard to 
the way (the Christian sect) more accurately, i.e. than to give a 
decision against Paul (comp. 25, 10), or than the complaint against 
him had represented. ‘Since Felix had been already procurator 
more than six years, and Christianity had spread itself, not only in 
all parts of Judea, but in Ceesarea itself, it is natural that he should 
have had a more correct knowledge of this religion than the Sanhe- 
drists on this occasion had sought to give him ; hence he did not con- 
demn the accused, but left the matter in suspense.” (Mey.) Other 
explanations are the following: knowing the case more accurately, 
i. e. as the result of the present trial (which would have been a rea- 
son for deciding it, instead of deferring it); knowing it more accu- 
rately than to postpone it, i. e. he should have acquitted Paul at once 
(which brings a severe reflection on his conduct into too close con- 

42 . 





330 ) NOTES. [CHAP. XXIV. 22-24, 


nection with the account of his lenity in the next verse) ; and, final- 
ly, knowing the case more exactly, i. e. when | know it, after hearing 
the testimony of Lysias. This last sense disregards the order of 
the words, as well as the proper meaning of d:ayvecopar, which 
signifies I will know fully, not will decide. 

V. 23. 1 éxarovrapyy, the centurion who had charge of Paul, 
and perhaps other prisoners (see 27, 1; 28, 16) ; not the one who 
had conducted:the troops from Antipatris (23, 32) in distinction 
from the one who returned, since dvo twas in 23, 23 leaves the 
number indefinite. — rnpeicOa adrov, not middle, to keep him (Eng. 
vers.), but that he should be kept, guarded. — €xew re aveow, and 
that he should have release, i. e. from some of the restraints of his 
captivity. He may have been freed from his chain, or permitted 
to occupy a different habitation. 


V. 24-27. Paul preaches before Felix and Drusilla. 


V. 24.  wapayevopevos, having come, not to Ceesarea, after a tem- 
porary absence, but to the place of audience ; comp. 25, 23; 5,21. 
— civ ApovoidrAy .... Iovdaia, with Drusilla, his wife, being a 
Jewess, which would imply that she still adhered to the Jewish re- 
ligion. This Drusilla was a younger daughter of Agrippa the First, 
who was mentioned in 12, 1 sq., and a sister of Agrippa the Sec- 
ond, who is mentioned in 25, 18. We turn to Josephus (Antt. 20. 
7. 1 sq.) and read the following account of her: ‘ Agrippa gave 
his sister Drusilla in marriage to Azizus, king of the Emesenes, 
who had consented to be circumcised for the sake of the alliance. 
But this marriage of Drusilla with Azizus was dissolved in a short 
time after this manner. When Festus was procurator of Judea, 
he saw her, and, being captivated by her beauty, persuaded her to 
desert her husband, transgress the laws of her country, and marry 
himself.’ ‘* Here,” as Paley observes, ‘ the public station of Felix, 
the name of his wife, and the circumstance of her religion, all ap- 
pear in perfect conformity with the sacred writer.” The fate of 
this woman was singular. She and her son, a fruit of this connec- 
tion with Festus, lost their lives by the eruption of Mount Vesuvius, 
in A. D. '79.— Luke does not inform us why Festus summoned 
Paul to this conference. We may infer from the presence of Dru- 
silla, that it was on her account. In all probability it was to afford 
her an opportunity to see and hear so noted a leader of the Chris- 
. tian sect. 


CHAP. XXIV. 25—27.] NOTES. 331 


V. 25. = mept dixavootyyns, concerning justice, which the conduct of 
Felix had so outraged. Tacitus draws this picture of him as a 
magistrate: ‘* Relying upon the influence of his brother at court, the 
infamous Pallas, this man acted as if he had a license to commit 
every crime with impunity.” (Ann. 12, 54.) — kai éyxpareias, and 
self-control, especially continence. Here we have another proof of 
the apostle’s courage. A victim of his libertinism was sitting at 
the side of Felix, as Paul spoke. — ¢uqoBos yevouevos, having become 
alarmed. — rd viv €xov, as to what is now, for the present (Kyp., 
De Wet., Mey.). The construction is that of an adverbial accusa- 
tive. K.§ 279, R. 10.— Place a comma or colon, not a period, 
at the end of the verse. 

V. 26. dua kai ehrigov, at the same time (that he gave this an- 
swer) hoping. ‘The participle connects itself with dmexpiéy (comp. 
23, 25), and is not to be taken as a finite verb. —éri ypipyara, 
xk. T. ., that money will be given to him by Paul, i. e. as an induce- 
ment to release him. — és Avon adtév, which we find in the com- 
mon text, suggests a correct idea, but is not genuine. Felix had 
conceived the hope that his prisoner would pay liberally for his 
freedom. He may have supposed him to have ample resources at 
his command; he knew that his friends were numerous, and had 
been informed (see v. 17) that they were not too poor or too selfish 
to assist one another. 

V.27. Suerias 8é rAnpobeions, Two years now having been com- 
pleted, i. e. since Paul’s imprisonment at Czesarea. — @AaBe duddoyorv 
6 BHALE Ldpxcov Sjorov. Luke wrote first, or we might suspect him 
of having copied Josephus: Topkiov 5€ @norov diaddxou Bydcke wep- 
bévros (Antt. 20.8.9). As to the year in which this change in the 
procuratorship took place, see Introd. § 6. 4.— 6éAov .... rots "Iov- 
daios, and wishing to lay up favor for himself with the Jews, to make 
himself popular among them ; which was the more important at this 
time, as they had a right to follow him to Rome, and complain of 
his administration if they were dissatisfied with it. His policy was 
unsuccessful ; see Introd. § 6. 4. An act like this, on leaving such 
an office, was not uncommon. ‘Thus Albinus, another corrupt procu- 
rator of Judea, having heard that Gessius Florus had been appointed 
to succeed him, liberated most of the state prisoners at Jerusalem, 
in order to conciliate the Jews. — dedeuevov, chained. He was de- 
prived of the degree of freedom which he had enjoyed, and con- 
signed again to strict military custody ; see on v. 28. 


332 NOTES. [cHAP, XXvV. 1-9. 


CHAPTER XXV. 


V.1-5. Festus refuses to bring Paul to Jerusalem. 


V.2. 6 dpyuepevs. This high-priest is supposed to have been 
Ismael, son of Phabi, who succeeded Ananias (Jos. Antt. 20. 8. 8). 
Two years have elapsed since the trial before Felix (24, ‘1 sq.), at 
which Ananias was so active. — oi mp@ro: = of mpeoBvrepor in v. 15. 

V. 3. alrodpevor xdpw, x. t. ., asking for themselves a favor 
against him, viz. that he would send for him, etc. — évédpay mowodv- 
tes, preparing an ambush, plotting ; see 23, 21. 

V.4. dmexpidn .... éxmopevec6a. Our English version conveys 
perhaps the idea of a peremptory refusal; viz. that Paul should 
be kept in custody at Cesarea, and not be brought to Jerusalem. 
But the answer of Festus imports this: the prisoner, as the Jews 
knew, was already at the other place, and, as he himself was about 
to return thither, it would be more convenient to have the trial at 
Ceesarea. 

V. 5. of duvarol év ipiv, the powerful among you, your chief men ; 
not those who are able, have it in their power (Calv., Grot., Eng. 
vers.). Josephus says “Iovdaiwy of duvaroi in the same sense (Bell. 
Jud. 1. 12. 4). 


V.6-12. Paul appeals from Festus to Cesar. 


V.'7. mepieorncav, stood around him, not the tribunal (Kuin.) ; 
comp. sept ob otadevres in v. 18.— Most manuscripts omit card rod 
IlavAov after pépovres. 'Tischendorf writes xaradépovres ; but others 
defend the simple participle. 

V.9. éxet.... ea épuod, there to be judged (viz. by the Sanhe- 
drim) before me, i. e. in his presence, while he should preside 
(Mey., De Wet., Wiesl.), and perhaps confirm or reject the decis- 
ion, ‘There are two views as to the import of this proposal. One 
is, that Festus intended merely to transfer the trial from Cesarea to 
Jerusalem ; and the other is, that he wished to change the jurisdic- 
tion in the case, to surrender Paul to the Jews, and allow them to 
decide whether he was innocent or guilty. The language is sus- 
ceptible of either construction (perhaps more readily of the first) ; 
but the second agrees best with the attendant circumstances. The 
reply of the apostle (émi rod Byyaros.... xpiverOa in v. 10), and the 


CHAP. XXV. 9—13.] NOTES. 333 


fact that he proceeds at once to place himself beyond the power of 
Festus, would appear to show that he regarded the question (déA«s, 
k. t. A.) as involving a relinquishment of his rights as a Roman 
citizen. 

V. 10. as Kat od KadXov exvywackeis, as also thou perceivest 
better, i. e. than to make such a proposal. W. § 36.3. 

V. 11. ddd some explain as an instance of the present includ- 
ing the past: If I have done and am doing wrong. See K. § 255, 
R. 1. But this form of the verb expresses here the result of an act, 
instead of the act itself: If I am unjust, guilty, i. e. in consequence 
of past wrong-doing. See W.§ 41. 2. c.—xkai déov.... 7 defines 
the degree of guilt. If it was such that he deserved to die, he was 
willing to die. — id oddév éorw dv = ef oddev éort TovTar a. 

V. 12. ovddadjoas pera tod cuuBovriov, having spoken with the 
council, i. e. the assessors or judges (mdpedpo, consiliarii) who as- 
sisted him at the trial. It was customary for the proconsul, or his 
substitute, to choose a number of men whose office it was to aid 
him in the administration of justice. The proconsul himself pre- 
sided, but was bound to consult his assessors, and give sentence in 
conformity with their views. The subject of consultation in this 
instance, doubtless, was whether the appeal should be allowed or 
refused. Writers on Roman law inform us that the provincial 
magistrates had a certain discretionary power in this respect. An 
appeal to the emperor was not granted in every case. It was 
necessary to consider the nature of the accusation, and also the 
amount of evidence which supported it. Some offences were held 
to be so enormous as to exclude the exercise of this right; and 
when the crime was not of this character, the evidence of guilt 
might be so palpable as to demand an immediate and final decision. 
—éni Kaicapa ropevon announced the ready conclusion in regard to 
the present appeal. | 


V. 138-22. Festus confers with Agrippa concerning Paul. 


V. 18. ’Aypimmas 6 Baowte’s. This Agrippa was a son of 
Agrippa the First. At his father’s death, as he was considered too 
young to succeed him on the throne, Judea was committed again to 
the government of procurators. He passed his early life at Rome. 
In A. D. 50, on the death of Herod, his uncle, he received the soy- 
ereignty of Chalcis, and in A. D. 53 the dominions of Philip and 
Lysanias, at which time he assumed the title of king. In the year 


334 NOTES. [CHAP. Xxv. 13-19. 


55 Nero added to his possessions a part of Galilea and Perea. He 
died, after a reign of nearly fifty years, in A. D. 100. It will be 
observed that, although Luke in this passage styles Agrippa a king, 
he does not style him king of Judea ; whereas, in speaking of his 
father (12, 1 sq.), he not only applies to him this title, but men- 
tions an instance of his exercise of the regal power at Jerusalem. 
The facts stated above show how perfectly this distinction conforms 
to the circumstances of the case. — Bepvixn. Bernice was the el- 
dest daughter of Agrippa the First, and a sister of Drusilla (24, 24). 
She was noted for her beauty and her profligacy. Luke’s accu- 
racy in introducing her at this stage of the history is worthy of re- 
mark. After a brief marriage with her first husband, she became 
the wife of Herod her uncle, king of Chalcis, and on his death re- 
mained for a time with Agrippa her brother. She was suspected 
of living with him in a criminal manner. Her third marriage with 
Polemon, king of Cilicia, she soon dissolved, and returned to her 
brother, not long before the death of the Emperor Claudius. She 
could have been with Agrippa, therefore, in the time of Festus, as 
Luke represents in our narrative. Her subsequent connection with 
Vespasian and Titus made her name familiar to the Roman writers. 
Several of them, as Tacitus, Suetonius, and Juvenal, either mention 
her expressly or allude to her. — donacopevor tov Sjorov, in order 
to salute Festus. It was their visit of congratulation. Agrippa, 
being a vassal of the Romans, came to pay his respects to this new 
representative of the power on which he was dependent. 

V. 15. évepdncar, informed, i. e. judicially, brought accusation ; 
comp. v. 2; 24, 1. —airovpevor.... dixny, asking for themselves 
justice against him. The idea of condemnation lies in kar’ adroi, 
not in Sdikny. 

V. 18. epi od belongs to orabevres (comp. v. 7), not to émeepov. 
The antecedent of 06 is dvdpa, not the remoter Bnyuaros. — airiay, sc. 
rovrav. — dv (= 4 by attraction) tmevdovy, which I suspected, i. e. 
some capital offence, as treason, robbery, or the like. 

V. 19. epi tis iias Serordaovrias, concerning their own re- 
ligion ; not superstition. Compare the Note on devoidatpoveorépous 
in 17,22. Agrippa was known to be a zealous Jew, and Festus 
would not have been so uncourteous as to describe his faith by an 
offensive term. Paley adduces the reply of Festus in this verse 
and the preceding as a mark of that candor which distinguishes 
those who relate the truth. ‘A mere panegyrist, or a dishonest 





” « 
ee A 





CHAP. XXV. 19-24. ] NOTES. . 335 


narrator, would not have represented his cause, or have made a 
great magistrate represent it, in this manner; 1. e. in terms not a 
little disparaging, and bespeaking on his part much unconcern and 
indifference about the matter. ‘The same observation may be re- 
peated of the speech which is ascribed to Gallio in 18, 15: ‘If it 
be a question of words and names, and of your law, look ye to it ; 
for I will be no judge of such matters.’ ” 

V. 20. eis rHv rept rovrov Cyrnow, in regard to the dispute con- 
cerning this one, viz. Jesus (v. 19); not this matter ; as if it were 
. neuter. But the best reading is mepi rovrwy, concerning these 
things, viz. in relation to their religion and the resurrection of 
Jesus. 

V. 21. rod dé Tatdov, x. tr. A., But Paul having appealed (and 
so demanded) that he should be kept as a prisoner; not reserved 
(Eng. vers.) ; comp. rnpetv6a: in the next clause. — is ri rod Se- 
Baorod didyvaow, with a view to the examination of Augustus. The 
Senate conferred this title on Octavius in the first instance ; but it 
was given also to his successors. — Instead of méuyo, shall send, 
we are to read dvaréuo, shall send up (Lachm., Tschdf., Mey.) ; 
comp. Luke. 23, 7. 11. 

V. 22. eBovdduny kai airés, I myself also could wish, i. e. were 
it possible. The Greeks employed the imperfect indicative to ex- 
press a present wish which the speaker regarded, or out of courtesy 
affected to regard, as one that could not be realized. Compare 
Rom. 9,3; Gal. 4,20. W.§ 42.2; S.§ 138.3; K. § 259, R. 6. 


V. 23-27. Paul is brought before Agrippa. 


‘V. 23. pera mors havracias, with much pomp, display, which 
consisted partly in their personal decorations (comp. 12, 21), and 
partly in the retinue which attended them. — eis 16 dxpoarnpiov, unto 
the place of audience, which the article represents as the customary 
one (Olsh.), or as the one to which they repaired on this occasion 
(Mey.). — avy trois xududpxos, with the chiliarchs, the commanders 
of the cohorts stationed at Czesarea, which were five in number 
(Jos. Bell. Jud. 3. 4. 2). Compare the Note on 27, 1. 

V. 24. The procurator could say way rd rAnO0s trav *Iovdaiwv, be- 
cause he had reason to know that the Jewish rulers (vy. 2, 15) who 
had demanded the death of Paul represented the popular feeling. 
Meyer suggests that a crowd, clamoring for the same object, may 
have accompanied them at the time of their application to the 


336 . NOTES. [CHAP, XXvV. 24-27. 


procurator. —évéruydv or, interceded (in its bad sense here) with 
me. A genitive or dative may follow this verb.— Some manu- 
scripts read (jv airdéy, and others airéy (jv; and so, in the next 
verse, some read Oavdrov avrov, and others adrév Oavarov. Such 
transpositions, which have no effect on the sense, show how unim- 
portant are many of the various readings of the sacred text. — 
pnxért. A qualification like this in a negative sentence requires a 
compound containing the py or ov« which precedes. K. § 318. 6; 
B. § 148. 6. 

V. 26. epi od, x. r. X., Concerning whom I have nothing sure, 
definite, to write to the sovereign. In such cases of appeal it was 
necessary to transmit to the emperor a written account of the of- 
fence charged as having been committed, and also of all the judi- 
cial proceedings that may have taken place in relation to it. Docu- 
ments of this description were called apostoli, or litere dimissoria. 
—xvpio answers to dominus. The writer’s accuracy should be re- 
marked here. It would have been a mistake to have applied this 
term to the emperor a few years earlier than this. Neither Augus- 
tus nor Tiberius would allow himself to be called dominus, because 
it implied the relation of master and slave. The appellation had 
now come into use as one of the imperial titles. — In cxé 1 ypdWo 
the pronoun belongs to the first verb, not to the second (Kuin.). 
Some repeat dogadés after 7 (Mey.), which is not necessary. 

V. 27. Goyov yap por Soxei, For it appears to me absurd. It 
was illegal, too; but Festus thinks of the act as being a violation, 
not so much of the law, as of the propriety which dictated the law. 
— réumovra, SC. Twa, kK. T. d., that any one (De Wet.) sending a 
prisoner should not also signify the charges (not crimes) against 
him. Some would make zéumovra the subject of onpava, without 
any ellipsis. K. § 238, R. 2.e. Some supply éye as the subject. 


It is more forcible in such a case to state the general rule or princi-. 


ple which controls the particular instance.— Josephus (Bell. Jud. 
2. 14. 1) describes Festus as a reasonable man, who was not desti- 
tute of a regard for justice and the laws, and, on the whole, he ap- 
pears as such a man in what is related of him by Luke. 








CHAP. XXVI. 1-3.] NOTES. 337 


CHAPTER XXVI. 


V. 1-23. Paul’s Speech before Agrippa. 


Tus speech of the apostle is similar to that which he delivered 
on the stairs of the castle (22, 1 sq.).. The main topic is the same 
in each, viz. the wonderful circumstances of his conversion ; but 
on this occasion he recounts them, not so much for the purpose of 
asserting his personal innocence, as of vindicating the divine origin 
of his commission, and the truth of the message proclaimed by 
him. This difference of design appears in the greater or less ful- 
ness with which he dwells on particular parts of the event, and in 
the bearing of the remarks that fall from him in the course of the 
recapitulation. On the former occasion, “he addressed the infuri- 
ated populace, and made his defence against the charges with 
which he was hotly pressed, of profaning the temple and apostatiz- 
ing from the Mosaic law. He now passes by these accusations, 
and, addressing himself to a more intelligent and dispassionate 
hearer, he takes the highest ground, and holds himself up as the 
apostle and messenger of God. With this view, therefore, he 
paints in more striking colors the awful scene of his conversion, 
and repeats more minutely that heavenly call which it was impossi- 
ble for him to disobey (v. 19), and in obeying which, though he 
incurred the displeasure of his countrymen (v. 21), he continued 
to receive the divine support (v. 22)... Humphry. 

V. 1. émerpémerar.... Aeyew. It is Agrippa who gives the per- 
mission to speak, because, being the guest and a king, he presides 
by right of courtesy. — éxreivas tiv xeipa denotes the act expressed 
by xaraceicas ri-xepi in 13, 16 (comp. 21, 40), and xaraceicas ri 
xeipa in 19, 33. It was a gesture that betokened respect for the 
audience. 

V.2. tnd "lovdaiwv, by Jews, without the article (comp. 22, 30) 
because he would represent the accusation as purely Jewish in its 
character. — Some copies place émi ood after paxdpiov, others after 
drodoyeioOa. The first is the best position, because it secures a 
stronger emphasis to the pronoun (Grsb., Tschdf.).— The object 
of #ynpa is the same as the subject, but the latter, which is more 
prominent, controls the case of pédAov. 

V. 3. pddtora yroortny dvra ce, since thou art especially (i. e. 

43 


338 NOTES. [CHAP. XXVI. 3-6. 


more than others) expert (lit. a knower). The accusative is ana- 
coluthic, instead of the genitive (Mey., Win., Rob.). W. § 32. 7. 
Some explain it as an instance of the accusative absolute ; but we 
have no clear example of that construction in the New Testament. 
éfOadpovs in Eph. 1, 18, which has been cited as an example of it, 
stands in apposition with rvedpa, or depends on 83. The Rabbinic 
writers * speak of Agrippa as having excelled in a knowledge of the 
law. As the tradition which they follow could not have flowed 
from this passage, it confirms the representation here by an unex- 
pected agreement. — xara “Iovdaiovs, among Jews, of whom we are 
led to think as existing in different places. W. § 53. d. — dd, 
therefore. In the presence of such a judge, he proposes to speak 
at length, and requests a patient hearing. 

V. 4. odv, now, transitive. The apostle passes here to his sub- 
ject. — ék vedrnros. See on 22, 3.—dzn’ dpyjs refers to the same 
period of his life, but marks it more strongly as an early period. 
It will be observed that, while the apostle repeats this idea in the 
successive clauses, he brings forward in each case a new circum- 
stance in connection with it. He states, first, how long the Jews 
had known him; secondly, where they had known him so long 
(év 7 eOver pee év ‘Iepoooddpos) 3 and, thirdly, what (dre xara rip 
axpiBeordrny aipeciy, kK. T. A. ) they had known of him so long and in 
that place. 

V. 5. apoywackovrés pe, Inowing me before (i. e. the present 
time). — kara riv axpiBeordrny aipeow, according to the strictest sect 
in regard both to doctrine and manner of life. Josephus describes 
this peculiarity of the Pharisees in similar language : edaBéorepor 
civaa rév ddaov Kai rods vépous axpiBéorepov ddnycicba (Bell. Jud. 
1. 5. 2). 

V. 6. tijs wpos rods marépas nuav émayyeAlas yevouerns, of the 
promise (i. e. of a Messiah) made unto our fathers (Kuin., Olsh., 
De Wet., Mey.). ‘The same expression occurs in Paul’s discourse 
at Antioch (13, 32), where it is said that God fulfilled the promise, 
or showed it to be fulfilled, by raising up Jesus from the dead. See 
the Note on that passage, Compare 28, 20.—éis jv, unto which, 
viz. the promise, its accomplishment. — deadexdgurov (= rais dHdexa 
gvAais in James 1, 1) exists only here, but is formed after the analo- 





* Sepp adduces the proof of this in his Das Leben Christi, Vol. IV. 
p. 138. 








CHAP. XXVI.6-10.] NOTES. 339 


gy of other compounds from 8édexa. ‘The Jewish nation consisted 
of those who were descended from the twelve tribes ; which fact 
justifies the expression historically, though the twelve tribes had 
now lost their separate existence. — év éxreveia, with earnestness. 
See on éxrevjs in 12, 5.— viera kal nuépay Aatpedvov, worshipping 
night and day. ‘This was a phrase which denoted habitual wor- 
ship, especially as connected with fasting and prayer. See Luke 
1, 75; 2,37; 18,1; 1 Thess. 5,17; 1 Tim. 5, 5. 

V. 7. mepi fis Amidos éyxadodpas. The apostle means to say, that 
he was accused of maintaining that this hope of a Messiah had been 
accomplished in Jesus, and had been accomplished in him because 
God raised him from the dead. The presence of the latter idea in 
the mind of the apostle leads to the interrogation in the next verse. 
— Aypinna after Baciwed has decisive evidence against it. — ind 
"Iovdaiwy is reserved to the end of the sentence, in order to state 
more strongly the inconsistency of such an accusation from such a 
source. | 

V. 8. si is printed in some editions as a separate question: 
What? Is it judged incredible 2? Other editions connect ri with 
the verb: Why is it judged incredible? Griesbach, Kuinoel, 
De Wette, and others, prefer the first mode; Knapp, Hahn, 
Meyer, and others, prefer the second mode. ‘The latter appears to 
me more agreeable to the calm energy of: the apostle’s manner. 
— tpiv extends the inquiry to all who were present. ‘I'he speaker 
uses the singular number when he addresses Agrippa personally ; 
see v. 2, 3, 27. — ci does not stand for ér, but presents the propo- 
sition as a doubted or problematical one: if God raises the dead 
(Mey., De Wet.). —éyeiper is present because it expresses a char- 
acteristic act. The resurrection of Jesus was past, but illustrated a 
permanent attribute or power on the part of God. 

V. 9. This verse may be slightly illative: I now indeed ; i. e. in 
consequence of a spirit of incredulity, like that of others. Pos- 
sibly per ody may be resumptive, carrying back the mind to v. 5; 
since we may regard what intervenes as digressive in its character. 
-— ofa éuavrd, seemed to myself, thought. — mpds rd dvopa “Ingo, 
against the name of Jesus; comp. mpés in Luke 23, 12. — wodda 
évavria, many things hostile. 

V. 10. 6 refers to the collective idea in mo\Aa évayria, — kai 
connects ézoinca with éo0fa. — kat moAXods, x. Tr. A., adds the facts in 
illustration of what was stated in general terms. — The common 


340 : NOTES. [CHAP. XXVI. 10, Il. 


text omits éy before du\axais, which could be justified as an instance 
of the local dative sometimes found after verbs compounded with 
xard. See Bernh. Synt., p. 243. The translation would then be, I 
shut up unto prisons. But Griesbach, Tischendorf, and others, al- 
lege good authority for reading éy gvAaxais, which would be the 
ordinary construction ; comp. Luke 3, 20.— mapa ray dpxtepéwv. 
See the Note on 9, 2. — dvatpovpévav .... Wihov, and as they 
(which refers to éyiwy as a class, not to those imprisoned) were put to 
death, I gave vote in favor of it, i. e. encouraged, approved the act 
(Bng., Kuin., De Wet., Mey.). xarjveyxa igor answers to cvvevdo- 
cay in 22, 20; comp. also 8, 1. Some insist on the literal sense of 
the phrase, and infer from it that Paul was a member of the Sanhe- 
drim, and voted with the other judges to put the Christians to death. 
But the Jews required, as a general rule, that those who held this 
office should be men of years; and Paul, at the time of Stephen’s 
martyrdom, could hardly have attained the proper age. It is said, 
too, on the authority of the later Jewish writers, that one of the 
necessary qualifications for being chosen into the Sanhedrim was 
that a man should be the father of a family, because he who is a 
parent may be expected to be merciful; a relation which, from the 
absence of any allusion to it in the apostle’s writings, we have 
every reason to believe that he never sustained. —airay agrees 
with the intimation of other passages (8, 3; 9,1; 22, 4), that 
Stephen was not the only victim whose blood was shed at this 
time. 

V. 11. «ai xara mdoas, x. r. X., and punishing them often 
throughout all the synagogues in the different places where he pur- 
sued his work of persecution. See 22,19. “The chief rulers of the 
synagogues, being also the judges of the people in many cases, espe- 
cially those which regarded religion (comp. on 9, 2), chose to give 
sentence against offenders, and see their sentence executed in the 
synagogue. Persons were always scourged in the presence of the 
judges (Vitr. de Synag. Vett., p. 177). For punishment being de- 
signed ‘in terrorem,’ what more likely to strike the mind with 


awe, and deter men from falling into the like errors, than to have it ~ 


executed in their religious assemblies, and in the face of the con- 
gregation? Our Lord foretold that his disciples should be scourged 
in the synagogues (Matt. 10, 17 ; 23, 34), and we learn here that 
Paul was an instrument in fulfilling this prediction, having beaten 
them that believed in every synagogue.” Biscoe. — jvdyxagov 


- 
=f. t'etiad a 

p ‘ : . Gears) <> oe me 

Ee eS ee ee ONT a ee Fe ee ee ee ee ee ae a ee el ae 








CHAP. XXVI. 11—14.] NOTES. 341 


Bracdnpeiv, I constrained them (i.e. urged them by threats and 
torture) to blaspheme, viz. Jesus, or the gospel; comp. 13, 45; 
James 2,'7. That, among the many who suffered this violence, 
every one preserved his fidelity, it would be unreasonable to affirm. 
We learn from Pliny’s letter to Trajan, that heathen persecutors 
applied the same test which Saul adopted, for the purpose of ascer- 
taining who were truly Christians. ‘ Propositus est libellus sine 
auctore, multorum nomina continens; qui negarent se esse Chri- 
stianos aut fuisse, quum preeunte me deos appellarent et imagini 
tuze (quam propter hoc jusseram cum simulacris numinum adferri) 
thure ac vino supplicarent, preeterea maledicerent Christo; quorum 
nihil cogi posse dicuntur qui sunt revera Christiani.” — éas 
kal eis ras tm médes, as far as even unto foreign cities, as those 
would be called which were out of Judea. Among these Luke and 
Paul single out Damascus, because a train of such events followed 
the apostle’s expedition to that city. 

V. 12. & ois, in which, while intent on this object; comp. 
24, 18. — é£ovaias and émirpomjs strengthen each other ; he had am- 
ple power to execute his commission. 

V. 13. jpépas peons. “* péon tpépa, pro meridie communis dia- 
lecti est, at peécov juépas, aut peonpBpia (22, 6) elegantiora.”” See 
Lob. ad Phryn. p. 55.— xara ri 6ddv, along the way (Mey., Rob.) ; 
on the way (De Wet.).— For pe after mepirduwar, see on 9, 3. — 
For rods ovtv éuol ropevopéevous, see on 22, 9. 

V. 14. mdvrov.... eis rv yiv, And we all having fallen down 
upon the earth, from the effect of terror, not as an act of reverence ; 
comp. 9,4; 22,17. In regard to the alleged inconsistency be- 
tween this statement and cfornxescay in 9,'7, see the Note on that 
passage. — oxAnpdy oot mpds xevtpa dakrifew, It is hard for thee to 
kick against goads. ‘The meaning is, that his opposition to the 
cause and will of Christ must be unavailing ; the continuance of it 
would only bring injury and ruin on himself. Wetstein has pro- 
duced examples of this proverb from both Greek and Latin writers. 
Euripides (Bacch. v. 791) applies it as here : @vpovpevos mpds xévrpa 
Aaxrifou, Ontos Sv OeG. Terence (Phorm. 1. 2. 27) employs 
it thus: ‘Num que inscitia est, Advorsum stimulum calces?” 
Plautus (4. 2. 55) has it in this form: “Si stimulos pugnis czdis, 
manibus plus dolet.”” The Scholiast on Pind. Pyth. 2. 173 ex- 
plains the origin of the expression : 4 8€ rpom) dd trav Body> réy yap 
oi draxrot kata TH yewpylay KevtpiCdpevos bd Tov apodvros, Aakrifover Td 


342 NOTES. [ CHAP. XXVI. 15-18, * 


Kevtpoy Kat paddov wAnrrovra. The same or a similar proverb must 
have existed among the Hebrews, though this is the only instance of 
it that has been preserved. 

V. 16. «is rodro prepares the mind for what follows; see on 
9, 21.— ydp shows that the command to arise was equivalent to 
assuring him that he had no occasion for such alarm (v. 14) ; the 
object of the vision was to summon him to a new and exalted 
sphere of effort. — mpoyeipicacbal oe innpérny, to appoint, select, thee 
as aminister. It is impossible to retain here the idea that the pur- 


pose of the selection was prior to the act; and the remark to that 


effect in the Note on 3, 20 I would cancel. — Understand rovrey 
after pdprupa as the attracting antecedent of aév.— dy re dpOnoopai 
cot is an unusual construction. The best solution is, that éy stands 
for d, taken as a sort of explanatory accusative (K. § 279. '7): as 
to which I will appear unto thee. So translate De Wette, Meyer, 
Winer, Robinson. See W. § 40, R. 1. Some resolve dy into 4 as 
put for 6’ d (Mey., De Wet.). Many commentators assign an ac- 
tive sense to ddOnoonar: which I will cause thee to see or know. 
This use of the verb has no warrant either in classic or Hellenistic 
Greek. 

V.17. é&apotpevos.... ebvav, delivering thee from the people, 
i. e. of the Jews (see on 10,2), and the heathen. For this sense 
of the participle, see 7, 10; 12, 11; 238, 27, etc. Such a promise 
was conditional from the nature of the case. It pledged to him the 
security which he needed for the accomplishment of his work until 
his work was done. Some render éfa:povpevos oe, selecting thee, so 
as to find here the idea of oxedos éxdoyjs in 9, 15 (Kuin., Hnr., 
Rob.). This interpretation would suit rod Aaod, but, as De Wette 
and Meyer remark, it is inappropriate or less appropriate to rav 
é6vav. — eis ods refers to both the nouns which precede. — The cor- 
rect text inserts éyo before oé, and omits viv. 

V.18. It is important to observe the relation of the different 
clauses to each other. dvoifa opOadpods airéy states the object of 
drooré\iw. — Tod emotpeva may derive its subject from avréy, or 
retain that of the preceding infinitive: that they may turn, or in 
order to turn them (Eng. vers.). Most prefer the first sense, 
as it agrees with émorpégdew in v. 20. This clause states the de- 
signed effect of the illumination which they should receive. — rod 
haBeiy, x. tT. A., expresses the direct object of the second infinitive 
and the ultimate object of the first. — For xAjpov év trois pyacpévors, 


= 








_ CHAP. XXVI. 18 — 23.] NOTES. 343 


see the Note on 20, 82.—siore rij cis eué, by faith on me, our 
English translators and some others join with jyacpevs ; but the 
words specify evidently the condition by which believers obtain the 
pardon of sin and an interest in the heavenly inheritance. jy- 
acpévas is added merely to indicate the spiritual nature of the 
kAnpov. 

V. 19. d6ev, whence, i. e. having been so instructed, and in such 
a manner. — ovk éyevdunv dme6ns describes the alacrity of his obe- 
dience in a stronger manner than if the idea had been expressed 
positively. — r otpavig drracia, the heavenly vision, apparition, i. e. 
of the Saviour’s person; comp. Luke 1, 22; 24, 23; 2 Cor. 12,1. _ 
See the last remark in the Note on 9, 7. | 

V. 20. «is wacav, x. r. X., and unto (i. e. the inhabitants of) ail 
the region of Judea; comp. anjyyeiday cis rv rédw in Luke 8, 34. 
Meyer extends rots from the other clause into this: and unto those 
throughout all the region. This analysis would be good, if the 
preposition were xard, but it does violence to eis. — déia rijs pera- 
voias épya, deeds worthy of repentance, consistent with a changed 
heart and life. 

V. 22. emixovpias.... beod, Having therefore obtained assist- 
ance from God ; since exposed to such dangers (éreipSvro dSiayerpi- 
cacGa in vy. 21) he must otherwise have perished. — paprupduevos 
pikp@ te kat peydro, testifying to both young and old (see 8, 10). 
It is uncertain whether this is the correct participle or the received 
paprupoipevos. ‘The latter would mean attested, approved both by 
young and old (Bretschn., Mey.) ; comp. 6,3; 10,22; 16,2; ie. 
since the apostle was calumniated to such an extent, he could claim 
a good testimony from the consciences of men. Some would take 
the form as middle, instead of passive: bearing witness; but con- 
fessedly without any example of that use. See Rob. Lex. s. v. 
Knapp, Tischendorf, Hahn, and others, approve of paprupdpevos. 
It has less support than the other word, but is more easily ex- 
plained. | 

V. 23.. This part of the sentence attaches itself to Néyev rather 
than to pedAovrav yiverOa. — ci rabnros 6 Xpiordés, whether the Messiah 
can suffer (De Wet., Mey.), which is the proper force of this termi- 
nation, and need not be given up here. The apostle, as I under- 
stand it, approaches the question on the Jewish side of it, not on the 
christian ; and that was, whether the Messiah, being such as many 
of the Jews expected, could suffer ; not whether he must suffer, in 


344 NOTES. [CHAP. XXVI. 23-25. 


order to fulfil the Scriptures. «i presents the points as the ques- 
tions which he was wont to discuss. Some make ei — érn, that, 
i. e. the sign of a moderated assertion. — mparos é& dvacrdcews ve- 
Kp@v —= mperérokos éx trav vexpov in Col. 1, 18. If this point was es- 
tablished, it followed that Jesus was the promised Saviour of men, 
and the author of eternal life to those who believe on him. 


V. 24-32. Agrippa pronounces Paul innocent. 


V. 24. radra I refer, with Meyer, to the words last spoken, and 
not to the entire speech (De Wet.). The idea of a resurrection, 
which excited the ridicule of the Athenians (17, 32), appeared 
equally absurd to the Roman Festus, and he could listen with pa- 
tience no longer. It is evident that rovrwy in v. 26 has reference to 
e& dvaotdcews vexpov in v. 23, and the intermediate raira would not 
be likelyto turn the mind to a, different subject. — drodoyoupévou 
may be present, because Festus interposed before Paul had fin- 
ished his defence (Mey.).—peyddAy rH govg. See on 14, 10. 
The ‘loud voice” was the effect of his surprise and astonish- 
ment. — paivy, thou art mad, which he says, not in jest (Olsh.), 
but because it really appeared to him that the infatuation under 
which he supposed Paul to be acting must spring from insanity 
(Neand., Mey., De Wet.).— 7a modd\a ypdupara admits of two 
senses : the many writings which thou readest (Kuin., Mey.), or 
the much learning which thou hast or art reputed to have (Neand., 
De Wet.). The latter is the more natural idea, and may have been 
suggested to the mind of Festus from his having heard that Paul 
was distinguished among the Jews for his scholarship. It is less 
probable that he was led to make the remark because he was 
struck with the evidence of superior knowledge evinced in Paul’s 
address. It-was able and eloquent, but would not be characterized 
as learned in any very strict sense of the term. 

V. 25. od paivopa,x.r.r. This reply of Paul is unsurpassed 
as a model of christian courtesy and self-command. Doddridge 
takes occasion to say here, that, ‘if great and good men who meet 
with rude and insolent treatment in the defence of the gospel 
would learn to behave with such moderation, it would be a great 
accession of strength to the christian cause.” — dAnfeias, of truth, as 
opposed, not to falsehood (his veracity was not impeached), but to 
the fancies, hallucinations, of a disordered intellect. — cappoodins 
is the opposite of pavia, i. e. a sound mind, 








CHAP. XXVI. 26-29. ] NOTES. 345 


V. 26. eniorara .... 6 Baorte’s, For the king knows well con- 
cerning these things, viz. the death and resurrection of Christ. 
The apostle is assured that Agrippa has heard of the events con- 
nected with the origin of Christianity, and could not deny that they 
were supported by evidence too credible to make it reproachful to 
a man’s understanding to admit the reality of these events. — mpds 
éy Kat mappnota{opevos Kad, unto whom also (i. e. because he has this 
knowledge) I speak boldly.—év yovia, in a corner, i. e. secretly. 
The expression was current in that sense (Wetst.).— rodro — 
tovray just before. The plural views the circumstances in detail, 
the singular as a whole. See the Note on 5,5. W. § 23. 5. 

V. 27. moredves, x.t.d. As Agrippa professed to believe the 
Scriptures, which foretold that the Messiah would rise from the 
dead, he was bound to admit that there was nothing irrational or 
improbable in the apostle’s testimony concerning an event which 
accomplished that prophecy. 

V. 28. ev ddiyp (sc. xpév@) .... yevérOar, In a little time (at 
this rate) you persuade me to become a Christian (Wetst., Raph., 
Kuin., Neand., De Wet., Rob.). It was not uncommon in Greek 
to omit xpdvos after this adjective. Wetstein, Raphel (Annott. II. 
p- 188), and others, have produced decisive examples of this ellip- 
sis. By taking év édiy@ as quantitative, instead of temporal, Meyer 
brings out this sense from the expression: With little, i. e. trouble, 
effort, you persuade me to become a Christian; in other words 
(said sarcastically), You appeal to me as if you thought me an easy 
convert to your faith. This would be, no doubt, the correct ex- 
planation, if, with Meyer, Tischendorf, and others, we adopt év 
peyd\@ as the correct reading in Paul’s reply, instead of év moAX6 ; 
but the testimony for the common text outweighs that against it 
(Neand., De Wet.). It is held, at present, to be unphilological to 
translate €v édty almost (Bez., Grot., Eng. vers.). The Greek 
for that sense would have been éAlyou, ddéyou Bet, or sap’ éAlyov. 
Agrippa appears to have been moved by the apostle’s earnest man- 
ner, but attempts to conceal his emotion under the form of a jest. 

V. 29. edéaiuny dy t@ 6G, I could pray to God, i.e. if I obeyed 
the impulse of my own heart, though it may be unavailing, For 
ay with the optative, see W. § 43. 1.b; B. § 189. m.15.—kad ép 
ddiy@ Kal év wohAG, both in a little and in much time. We may 
paraphrase the idea thus: “I could wish that you might become 
a Christian in a short time, as you say; and if not in a short 

44 


346 NOTES. [CHAP. XXVI. 29-32. 


time, in a long time. I should rejoice in such an event, could 
it ever take place, whether it were sooner or later.” If we 
read év peyddo, the words would then mean, whether by little 
effort or by great; whether he was to be converted with ease or 
difficulty. — mapexrds rév Seopav rovrwr, except these chains, which 
- were hanging upon his arms as he made his defence. Some have 
taken the language as figurative: except this state of captivity. 
The literal sense is not inconsistent with an occasional Roman 
usage. ‘Tacitus mentions the following scene as having occurred 
in the Roman Senate (Ann. 4. 28): ‘* Reus pater, accusator filius 
(nomen utrique Vibius Serenus) in senatum inducti sunt. Ab 
exilio retractus et tum catena vinctus, orante filio. At contra reus 
nihil infracto animo, obversus in filium quatere vincla, vocare ul- 
tores deos,”’ etc. 

V. 30. The best authorities read dvéorn te without kal radra 
einévros avrod. — 6 is repeated before Baowevs and yyeuov, because 
_they are the titles of different persons. — of ovykaOjpevor avrois 
are the military officers and magistrates who were mentioned in 
25, 23. 

V. 81. éddAowv mpds ddAndovs. The object of the conference 
was to ascertain Agrippa’s opinion in regard to the merits of the 
case. — For ovdév Oavdrov d&iov i} Seopav, see on 23, 29. — ovdev 
mpacoet, does nothing in that he holds such opinions, pursues such 
acourse. See W.§ 41, 2.c. It is not an instance of the present 
for the perfect (Kuin.). 

V. 82. amodredvoba edivaro, could have been (not could be) re- 
leased, i. e. at any previous time since his apprehension, before his 
appeal to Cesar. It will be seen that both verbs are in the past 
tense. As the appeal had been accepted, it could not be with- 
drawn, even with the consent of the parties (Bottg.). 





CHAP. XXVII. 1.] NOTES. 347 


CHAPTER XXVIII. 


V.1-5. Paul embarks at Caesarea for Rome, and proceeds as 
far as Myra. 


V. 1.  ékpi6y relates to the time of departure, not to the decision 
itself that they should be sent. — rod drom\civ is a lax use of the telic 
infinitive; comp. 18,10. W. § 45. 4. b. — jas includes the historian 
as one of the party. The plural pronoun of the first person was used 
last in 21, 18. —apedidovy is not so vague as the third person plu- 
ral impersonal, but expresses the idea more concretely (W. § 49. 1; 
S. § 174) : they delivered ; i. e. those who acted in this case under 
the command of the procurator. — érépous, other, i. e. additional 
prisoners, not different in character from Paul, viz. heathen, as 
Meyer supposes. Luke uses that term and aXos indiscriminately ; 
see 15,35; 17, 34.—The statement here, that not only Paul, but 
certain other prisoners, were sent by the same ship into Italy, im- 
plies, ag Paley remarks after Lardner, that the sending of persons 
from Judea to be tried at Rome was a common practice. Josephus 
confirms this intimation by a variety of instances. Among others, 
he mentions the following, which is the more pertinent as it took 
place about this time. ‘“‘ Felix,” he says (Life, § 3), ‘ for some 
slight. offence, bound and sent to Rome several priests of his ac- 
quaintance, honorable and good men, to answer for themselves to 
Ceesar.”” — omeipns 2<Baoris, of the Augustan cohort. It is well es- 
tablished that several legions in the Roman army, certainly the 2d, 
3d, and 8th, bore the above designation. No ancient writer, how- 
ever, mentions that any one of these was stationed in the East. 
Some critics suppose, notwithstanding the absence of any notice to 
this effect, that such may have been the fact, and that one of the . 
cohorts belonging to this legion, and distinguished by the same 
name, had its quarters at Caesarea. The more approved opinion 
is, that it. was an independent cohort, assigned to that particular ser- 
vice, and known as the Augustan or imperial, because, with refer- 
ence to its relation to the procurator, it corresponded in some sense 
to the emperor’s life-guard at Rome.* It may have taken the place 





* Such exceptions to the general system occur under every military es- 
tablishment. Speaking of that of England at a certain period, Mr. Macau- 


348 NOTES. [CHAP. XXVII. 1, 2. 


of the Italian cohort, which was mentioned in 10, 1; or, very possi- 
bly, as Meyer suggests, may have been identical with it. The two 
names are not inconsistent with this latter opinion. Augustan may 
have been the honorary appellation of the cohort, while it was 
called Italian by the people, because it consisted chiefly of Italians 
or Romans. ‘The other four cohorts at Cesarea, as stated by Jose- 
phus (Antt. 20. 8. '7; 19. 9. 2), were composed principally of 
Ceesareans, or Samaritans. | 

On account of this last circumstance, some explain omeipyns S<Ba- 
otis as meaning Sebastenean or Samaritan cohort, since the city of 
Samaria bore also the Greek name 3<8aorq in honor of the Emperor 
Augustus. But in that case, as Winer (Realw. II. p. 338), De 
Wette, Meyer, and others decide, we should have expected S<Ba- 
otnvav, instead of S<Buorjs, or an adjective equivalent in sense, 
formed like "IraAccy in 10, 1. Wieseler has proposed another view 
of the expression. It appears that Nero organized a body-guard, 
which he denominated Augustani (Suet. Ner. 20. 25) or Augustiani 
(Tac. Ann. 14. 15). The critic just named thinks that Julius may 
have been a centurion in that cohort, whose station of course was 
at Rome; and that, having been sent to the East for the execution 
of some public service, he was now returning to Italy with these 
prisoners under his charge. But that guard, as Wieseler himself 
mentions, was organized in the year A. D. 60; and, according to 
his own plan of chronology in the Acts, it was in that very year 
that Paul was sent from Cesarea to Rome. ‘This coincidence as 
to the time of the two occurrences leaves room for a_ possibility 
that the supposition referred to may be true, but it certainly creates 
a strong presumption against the probability of it. 

V.2. mroig "Adpapurrnrd, a vessel of Adramyttium, which was 
a seaport of Mysia, on the eastern shore of the A%gean Sea, oppo- 
site to Lesbos. It was on a bay of the same name, and was then 
a flourishing city. Pliny speaks of it as one of the most consider- 
able towns in that vicinity. No antiquities have been found here 
except a few coins. — Some critics prefer pédXovT: to the common 
pédrovres (Grsb., Mey., Tschdf.), though it is doubtful whether the 
latter should be relinquished (De Wet.). — mreiv rods xara tiv ’Aciav 





lay says that ‘a troop of dragoons, which did not form part of any regi- 
ment, was stationed near Berwick, for the purpose of i the peace 
among the moss-troopers of the border.”’ 


ee a eS 








CHAP. XXVII. 2.] NOTES. 349 


rérous, to sail (visit) the places along (the coast of) Asia. This verb, 
which is properly intransitive, may govern an accusative, after the 
analogy of mopeverOa dddv and the like. K. § 279. R. 5. See 
also Krig. Gr. § 46. 6. 3. Others regard rémovs as the place 
whither (Win., De Wet.). A few copies have eis after mei, which 
was inserted, no doubt, to render the construction easier. As Myra 
was one of the places where the ship stopped, Asia here may de- 
note Asia Minor. Luke’s prevalent use of the term restricts it to 
the western countries washed by the A%gean. —It would appear 
that they embarked in this Adramyttian ship because they had no 
opportunity at this time to sail directly from Cesarea to Italy. 
‘** The vessel was evidently bound for her own port, and her course 
from Cesarea thither necessarily led her close past the principal 
seaports of Asia. Now, this is also the course which a ship would 
take in making a voyage from Syria to Italy ; they would, there- 
fore, be so far on their voyage when they reached the coast of 
Asia, and in the great commercial marts on that coast they could 
not fail to find an opportunity for proceeding to their ulterior desti- 
nation.” * The opportunity which they expected presented itself at 
Myra (v. 6).—’Apiordpyov. This is the Aristarchus named in 
19, 29; 20,4. Our English translators speak of him, very strange- 
ly, as “one Aristarchus,” as if he were otherwise unknown. That 
he accompanied Paul to Rome appears also from Philem. 24; Col. 
4, 10; which Epistles the apostle wrote while in that city. In the 
latter passage he terms Aristarchus ovva:yyddoros, which, if taken 
literally, would lead us to suppose that he too had been apprehended 
and was now sent as a prisoner to Rome. But in Philem. 24 he is 
called merely cvvepyés, and hence it is more probable that he went 
with the apostle of his own accord, and that he received the other 
appellation merely as a commendatory one, because by such devo- 





* «The Voyage and Shipwreck of St. Paul,’’ ete. By James Smith, 
Esq., of Jordanhill, F. R. S.,ete. London. 1848, I have availed myself 
freely of the illustrations of this valuable treatise in the commentary on 
these chapters. No work has appeared for a long time that has thrown so 
much light upon any equal portion of the Scriptures. The author is entirely 
justified in expressing his belief, that the searching examination to which he 
has subjected the narrative has furnished a new and distinct argument for 
establishing the authenticity of the Acts. It would occasion too much rep- 
etition to quote this work in a formal manner. The reader is at liberty to 
attribute to it all that may be valuable in this division of the Notes. 


350 NOTES. [CHAP. XXVII. 2-4. 


tion to him he had thus made Paul’s captivity as it were his own. 
This is the general opinion of critics. We have every reason to 
suppose that Luke also went as the voluntary companion of the 
apostle. 

V. 3.  xarnyOnpev eis SiSdva, we landed at Sidon. ‘This city had 
anciently one of the finest harbors in the East, and was celebrated 
at this time for its wealth and commerce. It was the rival of Tyre ; 
see 21,3. The vessel stopped here perhaps for purposes of trade. 
The distance from Cesarea to Sidon was sixty-seven geographical 
miles. As they performed the voyage in a single day, they must 
have had a favorable wind. The prevailing winds now in that part 
of the Mediterranean, at the period of the year then arrived, are the 
westerly ;* and such a wind would have served their purpose. ‘The 
coast line between the two places bears N. N. E. The season of 
the year at which Paul commenced the voyage is known from v. 9. 
It must have been near the close of summer, or early in September. 
— paravbpdoras .... xpnoduevos. It is interesting to observe that 
the centurion manifested the same friendly disposition towards the 
apostle throughout the voyage. See v. 43; 28,16. It is not im- 
possible that he had been present on some of the occasions when 
Paul defended himself before his judges (see 24, 1; 25, 23), and 
that he was not only convinced of his prisoner’s innocence, but had 
been led to feel a personal interest in his character and fortunes. — 
rovs didovs, the friends, believers in that place. Sidon was a Phe- 
nician city; and, as we learn from 11, 19, the gospel had been 
preached in Pheenicia at an early period. See on 21, 4. The 
narrative presupposes that Paul had informed the centurion that 
there were Christians here. — wopevévra agrees with the suppressed 
subject of rvyeiv; comp. 26, 20. K. § 307, R. 2. It is corrected 
in some manuscripts to mopevdévrs, agreeing with avr@, implied after 
éemerpee. 

V.4. dmemdedoapev, x. 7. X., we sailed under Cyprus because the 
winds were contrary. It is evident from the next verse that they 
left this island on the left hand and passed to the north of it, instead 





* An English naval officer, at sea near Alexandria, under date of July 
4th, 1798, writes thus: ‘“‘ The wind continues to the westward. I am sorry 
to find it almost as prevailing as the trade winds.’ Again, on the 19th of 
the next month, he says: ‘* We have just gained sight of Cyprus, nearly 
the track we followed six weeks ago, so invariably do the westerly winds 
prevail at this season.” 








CHAP. XXVII. 4, 5.] | NOTES. 351 


of going to the south, which would have been their direct course in 
proceeding from Sidon to Proconsular Asia. The reason assigned 
for this is, that the winds were adverse to them. Such would have 
been the effect of the westerly winds which, as before stated, pre- ~ 
vail on that coast at this season, and which had favored their prog- 
ress hitherto. It may be supposed, therefore, that, these winds still 
continuing, they kept on their northern course after leaving Sidon, 
instead of turning towards the west or northwest, as they would 
have done under favorable circumstances. It is entirely consistent 
with this view that they are said to have sailed under Cyprus, if we 
adopt the meaning of this expression which some of the ablest 
authorities attach to it. Wetstein has stated what appears to be the 
true explanation as follows: ‘* Ubi navis vento contrario cogitur a 
rectu cursu decedere, ita ut tunc insula sit interposita inter ventum 
et navem, dicitur ferri infra insulam.” (Nov. Test. II. p. 637.) Ac- 
cording to this opinion, io in the verb affirms merely that the ship 
was on that side of the island from which the wind was blowing, 
i. €., to use a sea phrase, on the lee side. It decides nothing of it- 
self with respect to their vicinity to the island; though, from the 
nature of the case, it would not be natural to speak of sailing un- 
der a land, or being on the lee of it, unless the land was some- 
where near, rather than remote. In this instance they passed with- 
in sight of Cyprus, since that island was visible from the Syrian 
coast. See the Note on 13,4. Many commentators, on the other 
hand, render émemdevoapev tiv Kinpov, we sailed near Cyprus, as it 
were under its projecting shore. In this case they must have hada 
different wind from that supposed above, in order to enable them to 
cross from the coast of Palestine to that of Cyprus; but having 
gained that position, they must then have gone around to the north 
of that island, in accordance precisely with the other represen- 
tation. 

V. 5. 1d médayos 76 Kata tiv Kiukiay cai TappvuaAiay, the sea along 
Cilicia and Pamphylia, i.e. the coast of those countries. The 
Cilician Sea extended so far south as to include even Cyprus. 
That pass the Greeks called also Aulon Cilicitum.* The Pamphy- 
lian Sea lay directly west of the Cilician. Luke says nothing of 
any delay. in these seas, and the presumption is that the voyage 
here was a prosperous one. This agrees perfectly with what would 





* Hoffmann’s Griechenland und die Griechen, Vol. II. p. 1385, 


352 NOTES. [CHAP. XXVII. 5, 6. 


be expected under that coast at that season of the year. Instead 
of the westerly winds which had been opposed to them heretofore, 
they would be favored now by a land breeze * which prevails there 
during the summer months, as well as by a current which constant- 
ly runs to the westward along the coast of Asia Minor.t Their 
object in standing so far to the north was no doubt to take advan- 
tage of these circumstances, which were well known to ancient 
mariners. — Mvpa rijs Avkias. Myra was in the south of Lycia, two 
or three miles from the coast (Forbg. Handb. Il. p. 256). The 
vicinity abounds still in magnificent ruins, though some of them, 
especially the rock tombs, denote a later age than that of the apos- 
tlet The ancient port of Myra was Andriaca, which was identi- 
fied by Captain Beaufort at the bay of Andraki, ‘* where the boats 
trading with the district still anchor, or find shelter in a deep river 
opening into it.” 


V. 6-12. Incidents of the Voyage from Myra to Crete. 


V. 6. aroiov *Are~avdpivoy mreov, an Alexandrian ship about 
sailing. ‘The participle describes a proximate future, as in 21, 2. 3, 
etc. This ship was bound directly for Italy, having a cargo of 





* M. de Pagés, a French navigator, who was making a voyage from 
Syria to Marseilles, took the same course, for which he assigns also the rea- 
son which influenced probably the commander of Paul’s ship. ‘The 
winds from the west,” he says, “and consequently contrary, which prevail 
in these places in the summer, forced us to run to the north. We made for 
the coast of Caramania (Cilicia) in order to meet the northerly winds, and 
which we found accordingly.” 

t “From Syria to the Archipelago, there is a constant current to the 
westward.’ —Beaufort’s Description of the South Coast of Asia Minor, 
p- 39. Pococke found this current running so strong between Rhodes and 
the continent, that it broke into the cabin windows even in calm weather. 
— Description of the East, Vol. II. p. 236. 

} “The village of Dembra (the Turkish name of the modern Myra) occu- 


pies a small part of the site of the ancient city of Myra. The acropolis ~ 


crowns the bold precipice above. — We commenced the ascent to the acro- 
polis, at first exceedingly difficult, until we found an ancient road cut out of 
the rock, with steps leading to the summit. The walls of the acropolis are 
entirely built of small stones with mortar. We saw no remains of any 
more substantially or solidly built structures; but it is evidently the hill al- 
luded to by Strabo, upon which ‘ Myra is said to have been situated.’ ’? — 
Spratt and Forbes, Vol. I. p. 132. 


s = ais 


f n= 








CHAP. XXVII. 6, 7.] NOTES. 353 


wheat, as we learn from v. 38. See the Note there. Egypt at 
this time, it is well known, was one of the granaries of Rome ; and 
the vessels employed for the transportation of corn from that country 
were equal in size to the largest merchant-vessels of modern times. 
Hence this ship was able to accommodate the centurion and his 
numerous party, in addition to its own crew and lading. Josephus 
states (Life, § 3) that the ship in which he was wrecked in his 
voyage to Italy contained six hundred persons. Myra was almost 
due north from Alexandria ; and it is not improbable that the same ° 
westerly winds which forced the Adramyttian ship to the east of 
Cyprus drove the Alexandrian ship to Myra. The usual course 
from Alexandria to Italy was by the south of Crete; but when this 
was impracticable, vessels sailing from that port were accustomed 
to stand to the north till they reached the coast of Asia Minor, and 
then proceed to Italy through the southern part of the A®gean. 
See the proofs of this statement in Wetstein. The Alexandrian 
ship was not, therefore, out of her course at Myra, even if she had 
no call to touch there for the purposes of commerce. It may be 
added, that “the land breeze on the Cilician coast appears to be 
quite local, and consequently might enable Paul’s ship to reach 
Myra, although the prevalent wind did not admit of the ships in 
that harbor proceeding on their voyage.” — éveBi8acev tpas eis adrd 
(a vox nautica), he put us on board of it. It will be noticed that 
Luke employs such terms with great frequency, and with singular 
precision. He uses, for example, not less than thirteen different 
verbs which agree in this, that they mark in some way the pro- 
gression of the ship, but which differ inasmuch as they indicate its 
distance from the land, rate of movement, direction of the wind, 
or some such circumstance. With the exception of three of them, 
they are all nautical expressions. 

V. 7. év ixavais 8€ jpépas Bpadumdoodvres. The distance from Myra 
to Cnidus is not more-than a hundred and thirty geographical miles. 
They occupied, therefore, “ many days” in going a distance which 
with a decidedly fair wind they could have gone in a single day. 
We must conclude from this, that they were retarded by an un- 
favorable wind. Such a wind would have been one from the north- 
west, and it is precisely such a wind, as we learn from the Sailing 
Directions for the Mediterranean, that prevails in that part of the 
Archipelago during the summer months. According to Pliny, it 
begins in August, and blows for forty days. Sailing vessels almost 

45 


354 7 NOTES. [CHAP. XXVII. 7. 


invariably experience more or less delay in proceeding to the west 
in this part of the Mediterranean at that season of the year. But 
with northwest winds, says Mr. Smith, the ship could work up from 
Myra to Cnidus; because, until she reached that point, she had the 
advantage of a weather shore, under the lee of which she would 
have smooth water, and, as formerly mentioned, a westerly cur- 
rent; but it would be slowly and with difficulty. dds refers evi- 
dently to this laborious progress, and not, as our English version 
would suggest, to the fact of their having advanced barely so far. 
—Kvidov. Cnidus was the name both of a peninsula on the Carian 
coast, between Cos on the north and Rhodes on the south, and of a 
town on the Triopian promontory which formed the end of this 
peninsula. It is the town that is intended here. It was situated 
partly on the mainland, and partly on an island, with which it was 
connected by a causeway, on each side of which was an artificial 
harbor (Forbg. Hand. II. p. 221). ‘The small one,” says Captain 
Beaufort, ‘ has still a narrow entrance between high piers, and was 
evidently a closed basin for triremes. ‘The southern and largest 
port is formed by two transverse moles ; these noble works were 
carried into the sea at the depth of nearly a hundred feet. One of 
them is almost perfect, the other, which is more exposed to the 
southwest swell, can only be seen under water.” * — pi mpooedytos 
nas Tod dvepov, the wind not permitting us unto it, i. e. to ap- 
proach Cnidus, to take shelter in the harbor there, which would 
have been their first preference. ‘They adopted, therefore, the only 
other alternative which was left to them. mpocedw does not occur 
in the classics. mpds cannot well mean farther, as some allege, 
since they would have had no motive to continue the voyage in that 
direction, even if the weather had not opposed it. — tremActioapev tiv 
Kpjrnv kara Sadpaovny, we sailed under (i.e. to the leeward of) Crete 
against Salmone, a promontory which forms the eastern extremity 
of that island, and bears still the same name. An inspection of the 
map will show that their course hither from Cnidus must have been 
nearly south. The wind drove them in this direction. It has been 
said that they avoided the northern side of Crete, because it fur- 





* Caramania, or a Brief Description of the South Coast of Asia Minor, 
p. 76. ‘Few places bear more incontestable proofs of former magnificence. 
The whole area of the city is one promiscuous mass of ruins; among which 
. may be traced streets and gateways, porticos and theatres.” 








CHAP. XXvII. 7-9.] NOTES. 355 


nished no good ports ; but such is not the fact. Soudra and Longa 
Spina are excellent harbors on that side of the island. Having 
passed around Salmone, they would find a northwest wind as much 
opposed to them in navigating to the westward as it had been be- 
tween Myra and Cnidus; but, on the other hand, they would have 
for a time a similar advantage : the south side of Crete is a weather- 
shore, and with a northwest wind they could advance along the 
coast, until they reached that part of it which turns decidedly to- 
wards the north. Here they would be obliged to seek a harbor, and 
wait until the wind changed. ‘The course of movement indicated 
by Luke tallies exactly with these conditions. 

V.8. pods re mapadreysuevor adriy, and with difficulty coast- 
ing along it, viz. Crete, not Salmone, since the former, though 
not so near, is the principal word. Besides, Salmone was not 
so much an extended shore as a single point, and at all events 
did not extend so far as the place where they stopped. ‘This 
participle is a nautical word. — cis romov .... Aeévas, unto a cer- 
tain place called Fair Havens. No ancient writer mentions this 
harbor, but no one doubts that it is identical with the place known 
still under the same name, on the south of Crete, a few miles to 
the west of Cape Matala. This harbor consists of an open road- 
stead, or rather two roadsteads contiguous to each other, which 
may account for the plural designation. It is adapted, also, by 
its situation, to afford the shelter in northwest winds which the 
anchorage mentioned by Luke afforded to Paul’s vessel. Nautical 
- authorities assure us, that this place is the farthest point to which 
an ancient ship could have attained with northwesterly winds, be- 
‘cause here the land turns suddenly to the north. —¢é.... Aacaia. 
Here éyyis governs 6 as an adverb. #4», was, incorporates the no- 
tice with the history without excluding the present. Compare 17, 
21.23. K. § 256. 4.a. Lasea is otherwise unknown. Ancient 
Crete abounded in cities, every vestige of which, in many instan- 
ces, has been swept away. 

V.9. ‘Ikavotd S€ xpdvov Siayevopevov, Now a long time having 
elapsed, i. e. since the embarkation at Cesarea. The expression is 
to be taken in a relative sense. On leaving Palestine they expected 
to have reached Italy before the arrival of the stormy season, and 
would have accomplished their object had it not been for unforeseen 
delays. — évros 75n emtapadods Tod mods, the navigation being now un- 
safe, i. e. at this particular period of the year. mods is a later Greek 


356 NOTES. [CcHAP, XXVII. 9, 10. 


form for mod. W.§ 8.2. b; S. § 22. 2. — did 76 kal, x. 7. A. because 
also the fast was now past. xai adds this clause to the one imme- 
diately preceding, in order to fix more precisely the limits of the 
#5n there, by informing us how far the season was advanced. See 
W. § 57. 2. c.—ri vnoteiay denotes the fast kar é&oxqv, which 
the Jews observed on the great day of expiation, which fell on the 
tenth of the month Tisri, about the time of the autumnal equinox. 
See Lev. 16, 29; 23,27. Jahn’s Archwol. § 357. Philo also 
says that no prudent man thought of putting to sea after this season 
of the year. The Greeks and Romans considered the period of 
safe navigation as closing in October, and recommencing about the 
middle of March. Luke’s familiarity with the Jewish designations 
of time rendered it entirely natural for him to describe the progress 
of the year in this manner. It was not on account of the storms 
merely that ancient mariners dreaded so much a voyage in winter, 
but because the rains prevailed then, and the clouds obscured the 
sun and stars on which they were so dependent for the direction of 
their course. See the Note on v. 20. — rapyvet, exhorted them, viz. 
to remain here and not continue the voyage. It is not stated in so 
many words that this was his object, but it may be inferred from 
the argument which he employs, and from the representation in the 
next two verses, that they renewed the voyage in opposition to his 
‘ advice. See also v. 21. 

V. 10. cop, I perceive, have reason to think. This verb ex- 
presses a judgment which he had formed in view of what they had 
already experienced, as well as the probabilities of the case, looking 
at the future. The revelation which he afterwards received re- 
specting their fate, he announces in very different terms; see v. 
22, 23. He may be understood here as declaring his own personal 
conviction, that, if they now ventured to sea again, the ship would 
certainly be wrecked, and that among so many some of them at 
least would lose their lives. —In dru perd UBpeas, x. tr. A. We have 
a union of two different modes of expression. ‘The sentence be- 
gins as if peAdex 6 mods was to follow, but on reaching that verb 
the construction changes to the infinitive with its subject, as if érz had 
not preceded. See W. § 45. R. 2. Such variations are so com- 
mon, even in the best writers, that they are hardly to be reckoned as 
anacoluthic. — pera UBpeas cat moddjs Cnuias means with violence 
(lit. insolence, i. e. of the winds and waves) and much loss. The 
second noun states an effect of the first, which is applied here in a 


CHAP. XXVII. 10—12.] NOTES. 357 


sort of poetic way. In proof of this sense of d8pis, Kuinoel quotes 
TO Te Kavpa Kal THY amd Tov duBpev UBpw aropaxoueva from Jos. Antt. 
3.6.4. To render the words injury and loss does violence to the 
first of them, and makes them tautological. Some have relied for 
this meaning on Pind. Pyth. I. 140; but the poet is speaking, says 
Professor Vomel,* not of a shipwreck, but a sea-fight, and opis is 
used there in its strictest sense. Meyer understands it of the rash- 
ness, the presumption, which they would evince in committing them- 
selves again to the deep. If we assume that meaning here, we are 
to retain it naturally in v. 21; and it would be there a term of re- 
proach, which we should not expect the apostle to employ in such 
an address. 

V.11. éxarovrdépyns. In regard to the termination, see on 10, 1. 
— 1 kuBepynrn, the steersman, whose authority in ancient ships cor- 
responded very nearly with that of the captain in our vessels. — r6 
vavkdnpo, the owner, to whom the ship belonged. Among the an- 
cients the proprietor, instead of chartering his vessel to another, 
frequently went himself in her, and received as his share of the 
profit the money paid for carrying merchandise and passengers. — © 
tois 7d Tov IlavAov Aeyouevors Changes the object of the verb from 
that of a person toa thing. Compare 26, 20. 

V. 12. avevOerov, not well situated, inconvenient. The harbor 
deserved its name undoubtedly (see v. 8), for many purposes, but 
in the judgment of those to whose opinion it was most natural that 
the centurion should defer, it was not considered a desirable place 
for wintering. ‘The question was not whether they should attempt 
to proceed to Italy during the present season, but whether they 
should remain here in preference to seeking some other harbor 
where they might hope to be more secure. In this choice of evils, 
the advice of Paul was that they should remain here; and the 
event justified his discernment. — of mdeiovs, the majority. Their 
situation had become so critical, that a general consultation was held 
as to what should be done. — kdxeiOev, also from there, as they had 
sailed previously from other places, see v. 4, 6.— «is Soimka, unto 
Phenix, which must have been a town and harbor in the south of 
Crete, a little to the west of Fair Havens; comp. on v. 13. The 





* Of the Gymnasium at Frankfort on the Maine. In his Programme for 
1850, he has inserted a translation of this chapter of the Acts, with some 
critical remarks. 


358 NOTES. [ CHAP. XXVII. 12. 


palm-trees in that region are supposed to have given occasion to 
the name. Strabo mentions a harbor with this name on the 
south of Crete, and Ptolemy mentions a town called Pheenix, with 
a port which he terms Phaenicus. On the contrary, Stephanus 
Byzantinus calls the town Phcenicus, which Hierocles, again, calls 
Pheenice.* The best way to harmonize these notices is to suppose 
that the different names were, at times, applied promiscuously to 
the town and the harbor. It is uncertain with what modern port 
we are to identify the ancient Phoenix. Anopolis, Lutro (unless 
the places differ merely as town and harbor), Sphakia, Franco 
Castello, have each been supposed to be that port. — Aipéva rhs Kp7- 
ms PBdémovra kata AiBa Kal xara Xa@pov, a harbor looking towards 
Libs and Corus, i. e. the points from which the winds so called 
blew, viz. the southwest and the northwest. The intermediate point 
between these winds is west; so that the harbor would have faced 
in that direction, while the opposite shores receded from each other 
towards the south and north. This mode of employing the names 
of the winds is a constant usage in the ancient writers to designate, 
as we say, the points of the compass. Such is the general view of 
the meaning of this expression, and there can be no doubt of its 
correctness. 

Mr. Smith maintains that the Phcenix of Luke is the present 
Lutro. That harbor, however, opens to the east. ‘To reconcile 
Luke’s statement with this circumstance, he understands xara 
AiBa kai xara X&pov to mean according to the direction in which 
those winds blew, and not, as is generally supposed, whence they 
blew. ‘ Now this is exactly the description of Lutro, which looks 
or is open to the east; but having an island in front which shelters 
it, it has two entrances, one looking to the northeast, which is kara 
AiBa, and the other to the southeast, cara Xépov.” But it is unsafe 
to give up the common interpretation for the sake of such a coinci- 
dence ; it rests upon a usage of the Greek too well established to 
justify such a departure from it. This mode of explaining xara 
AiBa involves, I think, two incongruities: first, it assigns opposite 
senses to the same term, viz. southwest as the name of a wind, and 
northeast as the name of a quarter of the heavens; and, secondly, 
it destroys the force of Bdémovra, which implies certainly that the 
wind and the harbor confronted each other, and not that they were 





* See Hoffmann’s Griechenland und die Griechen, Vol. II. p. 1334. 


ee a Oe ee ee ee 





CHAP. XXVII. 12. ] NOTES. 359 


turned from each other. Mr. Smith adduces xara xipa kai dvepov 
from Herod. 4. 110; but the expression is not parallel as regards 
either the preposition or the noun. xara denotes there conformity 
of motion, and not of situation where the objects are at rest, and 
dveyos does not belong to the class of proper names, like Libs and 
Corus, which the Greeks employed in such geographical designa- 
tions. ‘There is a passage in Arrian,” he says, “still more ap- 
posite to this point. In his Periplus of the Euxine, he tells us that, 
when navigating the south coast of that sea, towards the east, he 
observed during a calm a cloud suddenly arise, which was driven 
before the east wind. Here there can be no mistake; the cloud 
must have been driven to the west.” But to translate xar’ eépoy in 
that manner assumes the point in dispute. The context presents no 
reason why we should not adopt the ordinary sense of such phrases ; 
viz. towards the east, i.e. the cloud appeared in that quarter. In 
this expression, therefore, Eurus would denote the point from which 
the east wind blows, and not whither.* 





* A criticism to this effect on Mr. Smith’s explanation of xara AiBa kal 
KaTa x@poy was inserted by the writer in the Bibliotheca Sacra, 1850, p. 751. 
Mr. Smith has had the kindness to address to me a private letter, communi- 
cating some additional facts which have come to his knowledge since the 
publication of his work on “‘ The Voyage and Shipwreck of Paul.’”’ In this 
letter he reaffirms the opinion to which exception was taken, and calls my 
attention again to the passage in Arrian, as conclusive in support of his 
position. A distinguished Hellenist (Professor Felton of the University at 
Cambridge) has favored me with the following remarks on that passage : — 
‘It is true that the cloud of which Arrian speaks was borne towards the 
west; but that is not expressed by car edpoy, but must be inferred from the 
circumstances of the case. The course of the voyage they were making 
was eastward; after a calm, during which they used their oars alone, ‘ sud- 
denly a cloud springing up broke out nearly east of us’ (dpva vedédn 
énavaordoa é&eppayn kar etdpov pddtora), and brought upon them a violent 
wind. The wind, of course, was an easterly wind, because it made their 
further progress towards the east slow and difficult. But the navigator in 
the phrase xar’ edpoyv is speaking of the direction in which he saw the cloud, 
not in which the cloud was moving. If he had been simply describing the 
direction in which the cloud was moving, as Herodotus is describing the 
motion of the ship (and not the direction in which the ship is seen from 
another point), then kar’ evpoy would mean with the Eurus or before the 
Eurus. .... Ifa person is floating on the wind, or driven by the wind, if he 
is in motion according to the wind, then of course his direction is determined 


360 NOTES. [CHAP. XXVII. 13, 14. 


V. 13-20. A Storm rages for many Days, and all Hope of 
Safety is destroyed. 


V.13. dromvetcavros 5é Nérov, Now when a south wind blew 
moderately. After passing Cape Matala, the extreme southern 
point of Crete, and only four or five miles to the west of Fair 
Havens, the coast turns suddenly to the north; and hence, for the 
rest of the way up to Phceenix, a south wind was as favorable a one 
as they could desire. — dd&avres ris mpobécews Kexparnkéva, thinking 
to have gained their purpose, regarding it as already secured. It 
was somewhat less than forty miles from Fair Havens to Pheenix. 
With a southern breeze, therefore, they could expect to reach 
their destination in a few hours. —dpavres, sc. ras dyxipas, having 
weighed. — iacov mapehéyovto tiv Kpnrnv, they coasted along Crete 
nearer, sc. than usual, i. e. quite near. This clause, as we see 
from the next verse, describes their progress immediately after 
leaving their anchorage at Fair Havens. It applies, therefore, to 
the first few miles of their course. During this distance, as has 
been suggested already, the coast continues to stretch towards the 
west ; and it was not until they had turned Cape Matala that they 
would have the full benefit of the southern breeze which had sprung 
up. With such a wind they would be able just to weather that 
point, provided they kept near to the shore. We have, therefore, a 
perfectly natural explanation of their proceeding in the manner 
that Luke has stated. 

V. 14. per od word, After not long, shortly. The tempest, 
therefore, came upon them before they had advanced far from their 
recent anchorage. They were still much nearer to that place than 
they were to Pheenix. It is important to observe this fact, because 
it shows what course the ship took in going from Crete to Claude. 
— ¢Bare kar airis dveyos ruperkos, a typhonic wind struck against 
it, i. e. the ship. Some critics, as Kuinoel, De Wette, Meyer, re- 
fer adrjs to Kpnrjv. But how can we understand it in that way, 
when it is said in the next verse that they yielded to the force of the 
wind, and were driven by it towards Claude, which is southwest 





by that of the wind. But if he is at rest, and looking according to the wind, 
he is looking where the wind is the most prominent object; that is, he is 
facing the wind, as Arrian’s crew were facing the cloud and the wind, and 
not turning his back upon it.” 


ee es i ee ee Fe 


CHAP. XXVII. 14, 15.] NOTES. 361 


from Fair Havens? It is impossible to admit that view, unless we 
suppose that in the course of a few moments it blew from precisely 
opposite quarters. The opinion of others appears to be more cor- 
rect, that the writer’s mind at avrjs was upon the ship, and that he 
uses that form of the pronoun because the mental antecedent was 
vads, Which actually occurs in v. 41, though mdoiov is Luke’s ordi- 
nary word for that idea. ¢Bade may imply after it éavrdy; or, 
which is more simple, may be taken as intransitive. rupavds 
describes the wind with reference to the whirling of the clouds oc- 
casioned by the meeting of opposite currents of the air. Pliny 
(2.48), in speaking of sudden blasts, says that they cause a vortex 
which is called “typhoon”; and Aulus Gellius (19. 1) mentions 
certain figures or appearances of the clouds in violent tempests, 
which it was customary to call “ typhoons.” This term is intended 
to give us an idea of the fury of the gale; and its name, EvpaxiAov 
as the word should most probably be written, denotes the point from 
which it came, i. e. Euroaquilo, as in the Vulgate, a northeast wind. 
This reading occurs in A and B, which are two of the oldest manu- 
scripts, and in some other authorities. It is approved by Grotius, 
Mill, Bentley, De Wette, and others. Lachmann inserts it in his 
edition of the text. The internal evidence favors that form of the 
word. A storm from that quarter accounts most perfectly for the 
course of the ship, and for the means employed to control it, 
mentioned or intimated in the sequel of the narrative. The other 
principal readings are EvpoxAvdav, compounded of edpos and xKrvdav, 
_ Eurus fluctus excitans, or, as De Wette thinks more correct, fluctus 
Euro excitatus ; and Evpucdvéer, from edpis and khidar, broad wave. 
It appears, therefore, that the gentle southern breeze with which 
they started changed suddenly to a violent north or northeast 
wind. Such a sudden change is a very common occurrence in 
those seas. An English naval officer, in his Remarks on the Archi- 
pelago, says: “ It is always safe to anchor under the lee of an isl- 
and with a northern wind, as it dies away gradually ; but it would 
be extremely dangerous with southerly winds, as they almost ‘in- 
variably shift to a violent northerly wind.” 

V.15. ovvapracbevros, being seized, caught by the wind. — dyro- 
pbarpeiv, to look in the face, withstand. It is said that the ancients 
often painted an eye on each side of the prow of their ships. It 
may not be easy to determine whether the personification implied 
in this mode of speaking arose from that practice, or whether the 

46 


362 NOTES. [CHAP. XXVII. 15, 16. 


practice arose from the personification. — émiSdvres, sc. 7d mdoiov, 
giving up the vessel to the wind. Some supply éavrovs as the ob- 
ject of the participle, in anticipation of the next verb. The idea is 
the same in both cases. — éedepopeba, we were borne, not hither and 
thither, but at the mercy of the wind, the direction of which we 
know from the next verse. 

V.16. vyoiov.... KAavdnv, Running under a certain small isl- 
and called Claude. This island Ptolemy calls Claudos. It bears 
now the name of Gozzo. As the gale commenced blowing soon 
after the departure from Fair Havens, the ship, in order to reach 
Claude, must have been driven to the southwest. Their course, had 
they been near Pheenix at the commencement of the storm, would 
have been due south. The effect which the wind produced shows 
what the direction of the wind was; it must have been from the 
north or northeast, which agrees, as we have seen, with the proba- 
ble import of the name which Luke has employed to designate the 
wind. drodpapovres implies, first, that they went before the wind 
(see on 16, 11); and secondly, according to the view suggested 
on v. 4, that they passed Claude so as to have the wind between 
them and that island, that is, since the direction of the wind has 
been already determined, they went to the southeast of it instead 
of the north. That they approached near to the island at the same 
time, may be inferred from their being able to accomplish the ob- 
ject mentioned in the next clause. Others infer their vicinity 
to the island from the preposition, which they take to mean wn- 
der the coast; but, as in the other case, they suppose that this was 
the southern coast, from the direction in which such a wind must 
have driven the ship.— pods... . tis oxddns, we were able with 
difficulty to secure the boat. ‘Those expert in maritime affairs say, 
that, while a vessel is scudding before a strong gale, her boat cannot 
be taken on board or lashed to the side of the vessel (see on v. 32) 
without extreme danger. Hence it is probable, that, when on the 
southern side of Claude, they were sheltered somewhat against the 
storm, and were able to arrest the progress of the ship sufficiently 
to enable them to accomplish this object. Yet the sea even here 
was still apparently so tempestuous as to render this a difficult 
operation. It may have added to the difficulty, that the boat, having 
been towed more than twenty miles through a raging sea, could 
hardly fail to have been filled with water. They had omitted this 
precaution at the outset because the weather was mild, and they 








CHAP, XXVII. 16, 17.] NOTES. 363 


had expected to be at sea but a few hours. It will be observed 
that Luke has not stated why they found it so difficult to secure the 
boat. We are left to conjecture the reasons. 

V.17. Bondcias éxpavro, they used helps, i. e. ropes, chains, and 
the like, for the purpose specified in the next clause, viz. that of 
undergirding the ship. Most scholars take this view of the mean- 
ing, and it is doubtless the correct one. De Wette would extend 
Bon@cias so as to include other similar expedients: they used helps, 
of which imofeyivres 76 mAoiov Was an example. BonOeias cannot 
denote the services of the passengers, as some have said; for we 
have no such limiting term annexed as that sense of the expression 
would require. The “helps” here are the tmofopara, which 
Hesychius defines as “ cables binding ships round the middle.” 
It is probable that ships were occasionally undergirded with wooden 
planks ; but that could only be done in the harbor, and was a dif- 
ferent thing from performing the process at sea. But how, the 
question arises next, were the cables applied so as to accomplish 
the proposed object? Falconer, in his Marine Dictionary, describes 
the mode of undergirding ships, as practised in modern navigation, 
in the following terms: “To frap a ship (ceintrer un vaisseau) is 
to pass four or five turns of a large cable-laid rope round the hull 
or frame of a ship, to support her in a great storm, or otherwise, 
when it is apprehended that she is not strong enough to resist the 
violent efforts of the sea. This expedient, however, is rarely put 
in practice.” In ancient times it was not uncommon to resort to 
this process. The larger ships on their more extended voyages 
carried with them izofepara, or ropes for undergirding, so as to be 
prepared for any emergency which might require them. The At- 
tic arsenals kept a supply of them always on hand for public use. 
This mode of strengthening a ship at sea, although not adopted so 
-often as it was anciently, is not unknown in the experience of mod- 
ern navigators. In 1815, Mr. Henry Hartley was employed to 
pilot the Russian fleet from England to the Baltic. One of the 
ships under his escort, the Jupiter, was frapped round the middle 
by three or four turns of a stream-cable. Sir George Back, on his 
return from his Arctic voyage in 1837, was forced, in consequence 
of the shattered and leaking condition of his ship, to undergird her. 
The Albion, a British frigate, in 1846, encountered a hurricane on 
her voyage from India, and was under the necessity of frap- 
ping her hull together to prevent her from sinking. To these 


364 NOTES. [CHAP. XXVII. 17. 


more recent instances many others of an earlier date might be 
added.* The common representation in regard to the ancient mode 
of applying the hypozomata to a ship makes it different from the 
modern usage. Boeckh’s view is the one followed in most of the 
recent works. According to his investigations, the ropes, instead of 
being passed under the bottom and fastened on deck, “ ran in a hori- 
zontal direction around the ship from the stern to the prow. They 
ran round the vessel in several circles, and at certain distances from 
one. another. The length of these tormenta, as they are called in 
Latin, varied accordingly as they ran around the higher or lower 
part of the ship, the latter being naturally shorter than the former. 
Their number varied according to the size of the ship.”* Mr. 
Smith, in his Dissertation on the Ships of the Ancients, controverts 
the foregoing opinion, as being founded on a misapprehension of 
the passages in the ancient writers which have been supposed to 
prove it. He maintains that the cables, instead of being applied 
lengthways, were drawn around the middle at right angles to the 
ship, and not parallel to it.{ The other mode, he says, ‘* must have 
been as impracticable as it would have been unavailing for the pur- 
pose of strengthening the ship.” Luke states a fact simply in re- 
lation to this matter; he does not describe the mode. The ques- 
tion, therefore, is one of archeological interest merely ; it does not 
affect the writer’s accuracy. — pi els thy Supt éxméowor, lest they 
should be stranded upon the Syrtis. The verb literally means to 
fall out, i. e. from the sea or deep water upon the land or rocks; 
comp. v. 26,29. Syrtis Major is here meant, which was on the 
coast of Africa, southwest from Crete. This gulf was an object of 
great dread to mariners on account of its dangerous shoals. The 





* Some suppose that Horace alludes to this practice in Od. 1. 14. 6: — 
«¢ Sine funibus Vix durare carine Possint imperiosius Aiquor.”’ The writer 
was once explaining this passage to a college class, according to that view, 
when one of the members who had been at sea stated that he himself had 
assisted in such an operation on board a vessel approaching our own coast. 

t This is quoted from the Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities, 
Art. Ships. The account rests on Boeckh’s authority. The writer of the 
article on Wavis in Pauly’s Real-Encyklopadie der classischen Alterthums- 
wissenschaft, follows the same authority. 

{ The mode of executing this mancuvre, as I am informed, or at least 
one mode, is to sink the ropes over the prow, and then draw them towards 
the middle of the ship, fastening the ends on deck. 





CHAP. XXVII. 17.] NOTES. 365 


other Syrtis was too far to the west to have been the one to which 
they would feel exposed in their present situation. Some have taken 
Siprw to denote a sand-bank near Claude; but as any such bank 
there must have been comparatively unknown, the writer with that 
allusion would more naturally have left out the article. — yaddoavres 
To oxevos, having lowered the sail. cxedos is indefinite, and may be 
applied to almost any of the ship’s appurtenances, as sails, masts, 
anchors, and the like. Many have supposed it to refer here to the 
mast, or, if there was more than one in this case, to the principal 
mast; but it would seem to put that supposition out of the question, 
that according to all probability the masts of the larger sailing ships 
among the ancients were not movable, like those of the smaller 
vessels, but were fixed in their position, and would require to be cut 
away; a mode of removal which the accompanying participle 
shows could not have been adopted in the present instance. ‘The 
surprising opinion of some, that oxedos is the anchor, is contradicted 
by the following otras éfépovro. Of the other applications of the 
word, the only one which the circumstances of the ship at this 
juncture naturally suggest is, that it refers to the sail. It is not 
certain how we are to take the article here. It leads us to think 
most directly perhaps of the large, square sail, which was attached 
to the principal mast. ‘The ancients had vessels with one, two, and 
three masts.* 6 would then point out that sail by way of eminence. 
The presumption is, that, if the ship carried other sails, as cannot 
well be doubted, they had taken them down before this; and now, 
having lowered the only one which they had continued to use, they 
let the vessel “* scud under bare poles.” This is the general view 
of the meaning. It would follow from this, that the wind must 
have changed its direction before they were wrecked on Melite ; 
for some thirteen days elapsed before that event, during which the 
storm continued to rage ; and within that time, had they been con- 
stantly driven before a northeast wind, they must have realized 
their fear of being stranded on the African coast. 

But an eastern gale in the Levant, at this season of the year, is 
apt to be lasting ; the wind maintains itself, though with unequal 
violence, for a considerable time, in the same quarter. Professor 
Newman, of the London University, states the following fact ¢ in his 





* See Pauly’s Real-Encyklopadie der classischen Alterthumswissen- 
schafi, Vol. V. p. 463. 
+ Communicated to the writer in the letter before mentioned (p. 359). 


366 NOTES. [CHAP. XXVII. 17, 18. 


own experience: ‘* We sailed from Larnica in Cyprus in a small 
Neapolitan ship with a Turkish crew, on the 2d of December, 1830. 
We were bound for Latika, in Syria, — the course almost due east, 
— but were driven back and forced to take refuge in the port of 
Famagousta, the ancient Salamis. Here we remained wind-bound 
for days. Owing to our frequent remonstrances, the captain sailed 
three times, but was always driven back, and once after encounter- 
ing very heavy seas and no small danger. It was finally the first 
of January, if my memory does not deceive me, when we reached 
the Syrian coast.”’ . It was probably such a gale which Paul’s ship 
encountered, that is, a series of gales from the east, but not a con- 
stant hurricane; for the seamen were able to anchor and to let 
down their boat, and a part of the crew to attempt to escape in it to 
the shore. If, then, we assume that the wind blew from the same 
point during the continuance of the storm, we must suppose that 
they adopted some precaution against being driven upon the African 
coast, which Luke does not mention, although his narrative may 
imply it. The only such precaution, according to the opinion of 
nautical men, which they could have adopted in their circumstances, 
was to turn the head of the vessel as far towards the northwest as 
the direction of the wind would allow, and at the same time keep 
as much sail spread as they could carry in so severe a gale. For 
this purpose, they would need the principal sail; and the sail low- 
ered is most likely to have been the sail above it, i. e. the topsail, 
or supparum, as the Romans termed it. By the adoption of these 
means they would avoid the shore on which they were so fearful of 
being cast, and drift in the direction of the island on which they 
were finally wrecked. 16, according to this supposition, would re- 
fer to the sail as definite in the conceptions of the writer, or as pre- 
sumptively well known to the reader. — ovras ééporro, thus (i. e. 
with the ship undergirded, and with the mainsail lowered ; or, it 


may be, with the topsail lowered and the stormsail set) they were. 


borne on, at the mercy of the elements. Here closes the account 
of the first fearful day. 

V. 18. acdhodpas 8€ xetpalopevav juadv, Now we being violently 
tempest-tost.— rh €é&js, on the following day,i.e. after their at- 
tempt to reach the port of Phoenix. The night brought to them no re- 
lief. The return of day disclosed to them new dangers. It was evi- 
dent that the ship must be lightened or founder at sea. Their next 
step, therefore, was to try the effect of this measure. — exBodjy émou- 


pa Se 


CHAP. XXVII. 18, 19. | NOTES. 367 


ovvro is one of the sea-phrases which Julius Pollux mentions as used 
by the ancients to denote the lightening of a ship at sea. The noun 
omits the article, because they cast out only a part of what the ves- 
sel contained. We are not told what it was that they sacrificed at 
this time ; it may have been their supernumerary spars and rigging, 
and some of the heavier and more accessible articles of merchandise 
with which the ship was laden. It appears from v. 38 that the bulk 
of the cargo consisted of wheat, and they reserved that until the 
last. The seamen in the vessel in which Jonah embarked had 
recourse to the same expedient. ‘* There was a mighty tempest in 
the sea, so that the ship was like to be broken. Then the mari- 
ners were afraid, and cried every man unto his god, and cast forth 
the wares that were in the ship into the sea, to lighten it of them.” 
(Jon. 1, 4. 5.) 

V.19. 1H rpiry. The third day arrives and the storm has not 
abated. They are obliged to lighten the ship still more. This re- 
newed necessity appears to indicate that the ship was in a leaking 
condition, and that the danger from this cause was becoming more 
and more imminent. It was one of the great perils to which an- 
cient vessels were exposed. ‘Their style of architecture was in- 
ferior to that of modern vessels; they were soon shattered in a 
storm, “sprang leaks”’ more easily, and had fewer means for re- 
pairing the injury. ‘‘ In the accounts of shipwrecks that have come 
down to us from ancient times, the loss of the ship must, in a great 
number of instances, be ascribed to this cause. Josephus tells us 
that, on his voyage to Italy, the ship sunk in the midst of the Adri- 
atic Sea (BamricOevros yap jyav tod mroiov Kard pécoy roy *Adpiay). 
He and some of his companions saved themselves’ by swimming ; 
the ship, therefore, did not go down during the gale, but in conse- 
quence of the damage she sustained during its continuance. One 
of St. Paul’s shipwrecks must have. taken place under the same 
circumstances ; for-he tells us, a day and a night I have been in 
the deep (2 Cor. 11, 25), supported no doubt on spars or fragments 
of the wreck. In Virgil’s description of the casualties of the ships 
of Aineas, some are driven on rocks, others on quicksands ; but 


‘laxis laterum compagibus omnes 
Accipiunt inimicum imbrem, rimisque fatiscunt.’ 


The fact, that.the ships of the ancients were provided with hypozo- 
mata or cables ready fitted for undergirding, as a necessary part of 


368 NOTES. [CHAP. XXVII. 19, 20. 


their stores, proves how liable they were to such casualties.” It 
is easy to see, therefore, what must have been the fate of Paul’s 
ship, had they not discovered land so providentially ; she must have 
foundered at sea, and all on board have perished. — adréyeipes... . 
é ppiivapev, we cast out with our own hands the furniture of the ship, 
such as tables, beds, chests, and the like. oxevjy is a very doubtful 
word. Meyer, De Wette, and others, attach to it the foregoing 
sense. Some understand it of the masts, yards, sails, and other 
equipments of the ship similar to these. If we adopt this interpreta- 
tion, we must regard the remark as applying to that class of objects in 
a general way ; for we see from v. 29 that they retained at least some 
of their anchors, and from vy. 44 that, at the last moment, they had 
boards and spars at command to assist them in reaching the shore. 
Some again, as Wetstein, Kuinoel, Winer, suppose oxevny to denote 
the baggage of the passengers. avrdyewpes would favor this mean- 
ing, but Aoiov is opposed to it. It would be necessary to take the 
genitive as that of the container: the baggage on board the ship. 
V. 20. pire... . emixeipévov, Now neither sun nor stars shining 
upon us for many days, and a storm not slight pressing upon us. 
Observe the force of the compounds. ‘The absence of the sun and 
stars increased their danger, since it deprived them of their only 
means of observation. ‘The Greeks and Romans, in the most im- 
proved state of navigation among them, were reluctant to venture out 
to sea beyond the sight of land. During the day they kept the high 
lands on shore, or some island, in view, to direct them ; and at night 
depended for the same purpose on the position, the rising and set- 
ting of different stars. Dict. of Antt., Art. Ships. The many or 
several days include, probably, the three days which have been 
mentioned, but how many of the eleven. days which followed 
(v. 27) before the final disaster is uncertain. We do not know 
how long the interval was between Paul’s address and that event. 
The expression would be inappropriate, however, unless it compre- 
hended the greater part of them. —Aomov, for the future, thence- 
forth. They relinquish now their last hope of escape; destruction 
seemed to be inevitable. In their condition they must have felt 
that their only resource was to run the vessel ashore. But the 
state of the weather rendered it impossible for them to distinguish 
in what direction the shore lay; and thus they were unable to make 
the only further effort for their preservation which was left to 
them. In judging of the dangers which menaced them, we must 


CHAP. XXVII. 20-24.] NOTES. 369 


take into account the state of the vessel, as well as the violence of 
the storm. — mepinpetro means was utterly taken away. — rod cd€e- 
ca depends on éAmis as a genitive construction ; comp. 14, 9. 


V. 21-26. In their Despair the Apostle cheers them with the 
Hope of Deliverance. i 


V. 21. soddjs dovrias denotes much abstinence as to time and de- 
gree, i. e. both long continued and severe, but not entire; see on v. 
33. This abstinence was not owing to their want of provisions (see 
v. 36), but was the effect, in part at least, of their fears and dejection 
of mind (see v. 22, 36) ; and in part, also, of the difficulty of prepar- 
ing food under such circumstances, and of the constant requisition 
made upon them for labor. ‘* The hardships which the crew en- 
dured during a gale of such continuance, and their exhaustion from 
labor at the pumps and hunger, may be imagined, but are not de- 
scribed.” — ex pev, x. 7. d. The apostle recalls to mind their 
former mistake in disregarding his advice, not to reproach them, 
but in order to show his claim to their confidence with reference 
tothe present communication. ev is unattended here by any re- 
sponding 8¢. — xepdjoai re rv UBpw ravrny Kai rhv Cyplav, and to have 
escaped (lit. gained) this violence and loss; see onv. 10. Lucrart 
was used in the same manner. ‘The phrase involves a just concep- 
tion ; since an imminent danger avoided is so much gained. 

V. 22. adqv tod mAoiov, except of the ship. This limitation 
qualifies, not the entire clause which precedes, but only droBod} 
ovdepia ora, which we are to repeat before the words here. pdvov 
would have marked the connection more precisely. See W. 
§ 65.7. As to the rest, compare the remarks on dewpé in v. 10. 

V. 23. mapéorn. Whether the angel appeared to the apostle in 
a vision or a dream, the mode of statement does not enable us to de- 
cide. See on 16, 9.— radvry rH vueri, this night just passed, or that 
which was passing. Most think it probable that Paul did not com- 
municate the revelatién to those in the ship until the return of day. 
— od eiyi, whose I am, to whom I belong as his property ; in other 
words, whose servant | am. — 6 kal Aatpedo, whom also I worship, 
to whom I offer religious service and homage. This verb refers to 
external acts of worship, and not toa religious life in general, ex- 
cept as the latter may be a concomitant of the former. 

V. 24. Kaicapi ce Set mapaorqva. See on 23,11. To remind 
the apostle of this still unfulfilled purpose of God, was the same 

47 


370 NOTES. [CHAP. XXVII. 24-27. 


thing as to assure him that he would escape the present danger. — 
Kexdpiora.... cov, God has given to thee all those who sail with 
thee. They should be preserved for his sake. No one supposes 
the declaration here to affirm less than this. Many think that it 
implies also that Paul had prayed for the safety of those in the ship 
with him ; and that he receives now the assurance that his prayer 
in their behalf has prevailed. Such is the view of Calvin, Bengel, 
Olshausen, De Wette, and others. Bengel remarks here: ‘ Faci- 
lius multi mali cum paucis’ piis servantur, quam unus pius cum 
multis reis perit. Navi huic similis mundus.” 

V. 25. morevo, x. 7.r. It is evident from v. 32 that the apostle 
had acquired a strong ascendency over the minds of the passengers 
in the ship, if not of the others. He could very properly, there- 
fore, urge his own confidence in God as a reason (yap) why they 
should dismiss their fears (edvpeire), so far at least as the preserva- 
tion of their lives was concerned. 

V. 26. «is vipoov twa, upon some island. More than this was 
not revealed to him. Paul was as ignorant of the name of the 
place where they were wrecked as the rest of them ; see v. 39. — 
d¢ opposes what they must suffer to what they would escape. — 
dei in such a communication may represent the event as not mere- 
ly certain, but certain because it was fixed by the divine purpose. 
— éxreceiv, be cast away. See the remark on v. 17. 


V. 27-32. The Discovery of Land; and the frustrated Attempt 
of the Mariners to desert the Ship. 


V. 27. recoaperxadexdrn ve, the fourteenth night since their de- 
parture from Fair Havens. — d:ahepopéevav judy ev tO ’Adpia, as we 
were borne through (sc. the waters, comp. v. 5) in the Adriatic. 
It has been said that the modern Malta lies too far south to be em- 
braced in the sea so designated. The statement is erroneous. 
In its restricted sense, the Adriatic was the sea between Italy and 
Greece ; but in a wider sense it comprehended also the Ionian Sea 
around Sicily, near which was Melite. (Forbg. Handb. II. p. 19 ; 
Win. Realw. I. p. 23.) The later Greek and Roman writers, as 
Biscoe has shown, gave the name to the entire sea as far south as 
Africa. —imevdow .... xopav, the mariners suspected that some 
land was approaching them. ‘ Luke uses here the graphic lan- 
guage of seamen, to whom the ship is the principal object, whilst 
the land rises and sinks, nears and recedes.” He does not state on 





CHAP. XXVII. 27, 28.] NOTES. 371 


what ground they suspected their vicinity to the land. It was, no 
doubt, the noise of the breakers. ‘This is usually the first notice 
of their danger which mariners have in coming upon a coast in a 
dark night. ‘This circumstance furnishes reason for believing that 
the traditionary scene of the shipwreck is the actual one. It is im- 
possible to enter St. Paul’s Bay from the east without passing near 
the point of Koura; and while the land there, as navigators inform 
us, is too low to be seen in a stormy night, the breakers can be 
heard at a considerable distance, and in a northeasterly gale are so 
violent as to form on charts the distinctive feature of that head- 
land. On the 10th of August, 1810, the British frigate Lively fell 
upon these breakers, in a dark night, and was lost. The quarter- 
master, who first observed them, stated, in his evidence at the court- 
martial, that at the distance of a quarter of a mile the land could 
not be seen, but that he saw the surf on the shore. 

The distance from Claude to the point of Koura is 476.6 miles. 
Luke’s narrative allows a fraction over thirteen days for the per- 
formance of this voyage. It must have occupied a day, or the 
greater part of a day, to have reached Claude after they left Fair 
Havens (see v. 13-16). According to the judgment of experi- 
enced seamen, “‘ the mean rate of drift of a ship circumstanced like 
that of Paul” (i. e. working its way in such a direction in a gale 
of moderate severity, against a northeast wind) would be thirty-six 
and a half miles in twenty-four hours. ‘ Hence, according to 
these calculations,” says Mr. Smith, ‘a ship starting late in the 
evening from Claude, would, by midnight on the fourteenth, be less 
than three miles from the entrance of St. Paul’s Bay. I admit that 
a coincidence so very close as this is, is to a certain extent acci- 
dental ; but it is an accident which could not have happened had 
there been any great inaccuracy on the part of the author of the 
narrative with regard to the numerous incidents upon which the 
calculations are founded, or had the ship been wrecked anywhere 
but at Malta.” 

V. 28. Bpaxd S€ Siacrjcavres, x... There was but a short dis- 
tance, it will be observed, between the two soundings ; and the rate 
of decrease in the depth of the water, viz. first, twenty fathoms, 
and then fifteen, is such as would not be found to exist on every 
coast. It is said that a vessel approaching Malta from the same 
direction finds the same soundings at the present day. — dpyud, 
fathom, (from épéya, to stretch,) onpaiver tiv exracw tdv xeupdv adv 
T® mAaTet TOU atHGovs. Etym. Magn. 


372 NOTES. [CHAP. XXVII. 29. 


V. 29. «is tpayeis romovs, upon rough, i. e. rocky, places. 
Their apprehension arose, not from what they saw, but from what 
they had reason to fear in a dark night on an unknown coast. — ék 
mptpyns .... Teaoapas, having cast out four anchors from the stern. 
** To anchor successfully in a gale of wind, on a lee shore, requires 
holding-ground of extraordinary tenacity. In St. Paul’s Bay, the 
traditionary locality of the shipwreck, the anchorage is thus de- 
scribed in the Sailing Directions: —‘ The harbor of St. Paul is 
open to easterly and northeast winds. It is, notwithstanding, safe 
for small ships, the ground, generally, being very good ; and while 
the cables hold there is no danger, as the anchors will never start.’ ” 
The ancient vessels did not carry, in general, so large anchors as 
those which we employ ; and hence they had often a greater num- 
ber. Athenzeus mentions a ship which had eight iron anchors. 
Paul’s ship, as we see from the next verse, had other anchors be- 
sides those which were dropped from the stern. The object of 
anchoring in that way was to arrest the progress of the ship more 
speedily. No time was to be lost, as they knew not that they 
might not founder the next moment upon the shoals where the 
breakers were dashing. ‘The ancient ships weré so constructed 
that they could anchor by the prow or the stern, as circumstances 
might require. Another advantage of the course here taken was 
that the head of the vessel was turned towards the land, which was 
their best position for running her ashore. That purpose they had 
no doubt formed already. ‘ By cutting away the anchors (ras 
dyxipas mepteddvres), loosing the bands of the rudders (dvévres rds 
Cevxrnpias), and hoisting the artemon (émapavres tov dprépova), all of 
which could be done simultaneously, the ship was immediately un- 
der command, and could be directed with precision to any part of 
the shore which offered a prospect of safety.”’ — nvxovro tpépay 
yeverOa, they desired that day might come. The remark is full of 
significance. In the darkness of the night they could not tell the 
full extent of the dangers which surrounded them. They must 
have longed for returning day on that account. In the mean time 
it must have been difficult to preserve a vessel which had been so 
long tempest-tost from sinking. Their only chance of escape was 
to strand the ship as soon as the light enabled them to select a 
place which admitted of it. It is evident that every moment’s de- 
lay must have been one of fearful suspense, as well as peril, to 
them. 








CHAP. XXVII. 30-33. ] NOTES. 373 


V. 30. réyv dé vavrdv, x. tr. AX. This ungenerous attempt of the 
seamen to escape confirms the remark before made, that the ship 
was probably in so shattered a state, as to render it uncertain 
whether it could outride the storm until morning. They may 
have had another motive for the act. ‘The shore might prove to be 
one on which they could not drive the vessel with any hope of 
safety ; and they may have deemed it more prudent to trust them- 
selves to the boat, than to remain and await the issue of that uncer- 
tainty. — yadacavray tiv oxadny, having lowered down the boat, 
which they had previously hoisted on board; see v. 16, 17.— 
aykvpas éxreivew, to carry out anchors, not cast them out, as in the 
English version. Favored by the darkness, and under color of the 
pretext assumed, they would have accomplished apparently their 
object, had not Paul’s watchful eye penetrated their design. 

V. 31. ciwey .... otpatidras. Paul addressed himself to the 
centurion and the soldiers, because the officers of the ship were 
implicated in the plot, or, in consequence of the general desertion, 
had no longer any power to enforce their orders. The soldiers are 
those who had charge of the different prisoners (v. 1), subject 
probably to the command of the centurion who had the particular 
care of the apostle. — otra, these, viz. the mariners. — tpeis co- 
Onva ov Svvacbe, ye cannot be saved. ‘The soldiers were destitute of 
the skill which the management of the ship required. It could not 
be brought successfully to land without the help of the mariners. 
This remark of Paul proves that the plan to abandon the vessel was 
not confined to a portion of the crew, but was a general one. 

V. 32. ra cxowia tis cxadns, the ropes of the boat, which fas- 
tened it to the vessel ; not those by which they were lowering it, as 
that was already done. — etacay airny éxneceiv, let it fall off (i.e. 
from the side or stern of the vessel), go adrift. 


V. 33-38. Paul. renews his Assurance that their Lives would be 
saved. They partake of Food, and again lighten the Ship. 


V. 33. dypr.... yiverba, Now until it should be day, i. e. in 
the interval between the midnight mentioned in v. 27 and the sub- 
sequent morning. — ojpepoy is appositional in sense with juépay. — 
mpoodoxarvres, waiting for the cessation of the storm (De Wet.), — 
dovrot Suaredcire, ye continue fasting, where the adjective supplies 
the place of a participle. W. § 46.— pydev mpochaBduevan, having 
taken nothing, adequate to their proper nourishment, no regular 


374 NOTES. [CHAP. XXVII. 33—37. 


food, during all this time; see v. 21.‘ Appian speaks of an army, 
which, for twenty days together, had neither food nor sleep; by 
which he must mean, that they neither made full meals nor slept 
whole nights together. ‘The same interpretation must be given to 
this phrase.” Doddridge. The apostle’s language could not be 
mistaken by those to whom it was addressed. Compare v. 21. _ 

V. 34. rotro.... imdpxet, for this (viz. that they should partake 
of food) is important for your preservation. For xpos with this 
sense, see W. § 51. 5. f. They would have to submit to much 
fatigue and labor before they reached the shore, and needed, there- 
fore, to recruit their strength. — ovdevds .... meoeira. This was a 
proverbial expression, employed to convey an assurance of entire 
safety. See 1 Kings 1, 52; Luke 21, 18. 

V. 35. dprov, bread. 'This word, by a Hebraistic usage, often 
signifies food in the New Testament; but «ddcas, which follows, 
appears to exclude that sense here. Yet the present meal had no 
doubt its other accompaniments ; the bread only being mentioned 
because that, according to the Hebrew custom, was broken and 
distributed among the guests after the giving of thanks. The 
apostle performed, on this occasion, the usual office of the head of 
a Hebrew family. Olshausen expresses the fanciful opinion, as it 
seems to me, that the Christians among them regarded this act as 
commemorative of the Lord’s Supper, though the others did not 
understand Paul’s design. The language employed here, it is true, 
more frequently describes that ordinance, but it is used also of an 
ordinary meal; see Luke 24, 30. 

V. 36. e&Ovpor dé yevdpevor mavres, Having all now become 
cheerful. It is not accidental that the writer makes this remark in 
connection with mpoceAdBovro rpopjs. In their despair they had lost 
their inclination to eat; but the return of hope brought with it a 
keener sense of their wants, and they could now think of satisfying 
their hunger. See on v. 21, 33.— kai adroi, also themselves as well 
as he. The apostle had set them the example (ip£aro éodiew), and 
they all followed it. 

V. 37. ai raca Woyai, all the souls together. For this adver- 
bial use of was, see the Note on 19,7. For this use of Wuyai, see 
on 2, 41. — dvaxdora EBdopunkovra &&, two hundred and seventy-six. 
The number of persons on board shows that the vessel must have 
been one of the larger size. In the reign of Commodus, one of 
the Alexandrian wheat ships was driven, by stress of weather, into 


~ 


CHAP. XXVII. 37, 38.] NOTES. 375 


the Pireeus, and excited great curiosity on the part of the Athe- 
nians. Lucian visited this vessel, and has laid the scene of one of 
his Dialogues (mAoiov # edyat) on board of her. From the informa- 
tion furnished by him it has been estimated that the keel of this 
ship was about one hundred feet in length, and that she would 
measure between eleven and twelve hundred tons. Her dimen- 
sions, therefore, although inferior to those of many modern vessels, 
‘“‘ were quite equal to those of the largest class of modern mer- 
chantmen.” Luke’s ship was engaged in the same commerce 
(being, to use Lucian’s language, piav tév am ’Aryirrov eis “Iradiav 
o.raywyov) ; and we have no reason to be surprised at her contain- 
ing such a number of men. See further on v. 6. | 

V. 38. éxovdifov rd mAviov. Among the nautical terms of Julius 
Pollux, we find xovdioca tiv vaiv ; see on v. 18. Luke states mere- 
ly the fact, that they lightened the ship again (it is the third time), 
but gives no explanation of it. ‘The object may have been to di- 
minish the depth of water which the ship drew, so as to enable them 
to approach nearer to the shore before striking. It has been con- 
jectured also, that the vessel may have been leaking so fast that the 
measure was necessary in order to keep her from sinking. — rév 
girov, the wheat or grain, corn, since the term has frequently 
that wider sense. If we adopt the view which was suggested on 
y. 18, we are to understand here that they threw into the sea the 
grain which constituted the cargo, or the bulk of the cargo, which 
the ship carried. The fact that the ship belonged to Alexandria is 
presumptive proof that she was loaded with grain, since that was 
the principal commodity exported from Egypt to Italy. The ex- 
plicit notice here, that they lightened the ship by throwing the grain 
into the sea, harmonizes with that presumption, and tends to con- 
firm it. Some have thought that ciroy may denote the ship’s pro- 
visions ; but these would have consisted of various different arti- 
cles, and would not naturally be described by so specific a term as 
this. ‘The connection, which has been said to favor the opinion last 
stated, agrees equally well with the other. Having their hopes re- 
vived by the spectacle of Paul’s undisturbed serenity, and by his 
animating address, and being reinvigorated after so long a fast by 
the food of which they had partaken, they were now in a condition 
both of mind and body to address themselves to the labors which 
their safety required. This view, therefore, places their lightening 
of the ship in a perfectly natural connection with the circumstances 


376 NOTES. [CHAP. XXVII. 38, 39. 


related just before. In addition to this, as Hemsen urges, their re- 
maining stock of provisions, after so protracted a voyage, must 
have been already so reduced that it could have had little or no 
effect on the ship, whether they were thrown away or retained. — 
Mr. Blunt has very properly called attention to the manner in which 
the narrative discloses to us the nature of the ship’s cargo. In the 
fifth verse we are informed that the vessel “into which the centu- 
rion removed Paul and the other prisoners at Myra belonged to 
Alexandria, and was sailing into Italy. From the tenth verse we 
learn that it was a merchant-vessel, for mention is made of its 
lading, but the nature of the lading is not directly stated. In 
this verse, at a distance of some thirty verses from the last, we find, 
by the merest chance, of what its cargo consisted. The freight was 
naturally enough kept till it could be kept no longer, and then we 
discover for the first time that it was wheat ; the very article which 
such vessels were accustomed to carry from Egypt to Italy. These 
notices, so detached from each other, tell a continuous story, but it 
is not perceived till they are brought together. The circumstances 
drop out one by one in the course of the narrative, unarranged, un- 
premeditated, thoroughly incidental; so that the chapter might be 
read twenty times, and their agreement with one another and with 
contemporary history be still overlooked.’’ * 


V. 89-44. The Shipwreck. Those on board escape to the Shore 
by swimming, or on Fragments of the Vessel. 


V. 89. ri yay otk éemeyiveckov, they recognized not the land, 
within view. ‘The day had dawned, and they could now distinguish 
it. It has appeared to some surprising that none of those on board 
should have known a place with which those at least who were 
accustomed to the sea might be expected to have been so well ac- 
quainted. ‘The answer is, that the scene of the shipwreck was re- 
mote from the principal harbor, and, as those who have been on the 
spot testify, distinguished by no marked feature which would render 
it known even to a native, if he came unexpectedly upon it. — 
KoAmrov ...+ alyradov, they perceived a certain inlet, creek, having a 
shore, i. €.,in a seaman’s sense of the expression, a shore on which 
they could run the ship with a hope of saving their lives. ‘* Luke 
uses here the correct hydrographical term.” The remark implies 





* Veracity of the Writings of the Old and New Testament, p. 326. 


= on 


CHAP. XXVII. 39, 40. ] NOTES. 377 


that the coast generally was unsafe for such an attempt. The 
present conformation of the coast on that side of Malta confirms 
Luke’s accuracy in this particular. The shore there presents an 
unbroken chain of rocks, interrupted at only two points. — eis dv 
. +++ WAotov, into which they determined, if they could, to thrust 
forth (i. e. from the sea), to drive ashore, the ship. For égéoa 
from é£a6éo, see W. § 15; K.§ 165. 7. The wind must have 
forced them to the west side of the bay, which is rocky, but has 
two creeks. One of these, Mestara Valley, has a shore. The 
other has no longer a sandy beach, but must have had one former- 
ly, which has evidently been worn away by the action of the sea. 
V. 40. Kat ras dykipas .... Oddaocay, and having entirely cut 
away the anchors they abandoned them unto the sea. On this force 
of the preposition in mepiehdvres, comp. mepinpeiro in v. 20. It has 
been referred to the position of the anchors as being around the 
ship; but they had all been dropped from the stern (v. 29), and 
could not well have become scattered so as to be on different sides 
of the vessel. Our English translators followed the Vulgate in 
their inaccurate version of this clause. — dya.... mndadiov, at the 
same time having unfastened the bands of the rudders. Most of 
the ancient vessels were furnished with two rudders. No sea-going 
vessel had less than two, although small boats and river craft, such 
as those on the Nile, were sometimes steered by one. The mydadua 
were more like oars or paddles than our modern helm. They were 
attached to the stern, one on each quarter, distinguished as the right 
and the left rudder. In the larger ships the extremities of the rud- 
ders were joined by a pole, which was moved by one man and kept 
the rudders always parallel. See Dict. of Antt., Art. Gubernaculum. 
When a vessel was anchored by the stern, as was the case here, 
it would be necessary to lift the rudders out of the water and to se- 
cure them by bands. These bands it would be necessary to un- 
fasten when the ship was again got under way. dvévres is the sec- 
ond aorist participle in the active from dvinus; K. § 180. See on 
16, 26. — éndparres ....7h mveoton, Sc. apa, having hoisted the 
foresail to the wind. dpréyov has been taken by different writers 
as the name of almost every sail which a vessel carries, e. g, main- 
sail, topsail, jib, etc. We have no ancient definition of the term 
which throws any certain light upon its meaning. It passed into 
some of the modern languages, where it is variously applied, but 
occurs in no ancient Greek author out of Luke’s account of this 
48 


378 NOTES. [CHAP. XXVII. 40, 41. 


voyage. Most commentators, without any attempt to substantiate 
their opinion, put it down as the “ mainsail.” The nautical argu- 
ment is said to be in favor of the foresail, i. e. the sail attached to 
the mast nearest to the prow; or, if there was but one mast, fixed 
to a spar or yard near the prow. ‘‘ As the ancients depended for 
speed chiefly upon one principal sail, an appendage or additional 
sail at the bow of the ship was required for the purpose of direct- 
ing the vessel when in the act of putting about ; for, although there 
could be no difficulty in bringing the ship’s head to the wind with 
the great sail alone, a small sail at the bow would be indispensa- 
ble for making her ‘ pay off, that is, bringing her head round ; 
otherwise she would acquire stern-way, and thereby endanger the 
rudders, if not the ship itself.”” The vessels on coins and in other 
ancient representations exhibit a sail of this description. With this 
sail raised, it is said that a ship situated like that of Paul would 
move towards the shore with more precision and velocity than with 
any other. ‘A sailor will at once see that the foresail was the best 
possible sail that could be set under the circumstances.” 

V. 41. mepureodvres S€ eis rérov S:bddacaov, having fallen upon a 
place having two seas. ‘This has been supposed by many commen- 
tators to have been a concealed shoal or sand-bank, formed by the 
action of two opposite currents. In the course of time such a 
bank, as is frequently the case at the mouth of rivers or near the 
shore, may have been worn away,* so that the absence of any 
such obstruction there at the present time decides nothing against 
that supposition. It has also been understood to have been a 
tongue of land or promontory, against the shores of which the sea 
beat strongly from opposite quarters. It is not stated that any pro- 
jection exists there now, to which Luke’s description, if explained 
in that manner, would apply. Mr. Smith is of the opinion that 
réros SiOddacoos may refer to the channel, not more than a hundred 
yards in breadth, which separates the small island Salmone from 
Malta; and which might very properly be called a place where 
** two seas meet,”’ on account of the communication which it forms 
between the sea in the interior of the bay and the sea outside. He 
would place the scene of the shipwreck near that channel, and, ac- 
cording to the representation on his map, a little to the north of the 





* For examples of this, see Lyell’s Principles of Geology, p. 285 sq. (8th 
ed., 1850). 





CHAP. XXVII. 41—44.] NOTES. 379 


place to which tradition has generally assigned it. The creek near 
here, at present without a beach (see v. 39), may be the one which 
they attempted to enter. The final shock now ensues. — kai 7 pév 
mpapa, x. t.r., And the prow, sticking fast, remained immovable, but 
ihe stern was broken by the violence of the waves. ‘ This is a re- 
markable circumstance, which, but for the peculiar nature of the 
bottom of St. Paul’s Bay, it would be difficult to account for. The 
rocks of Malta disintegrate into extremely minute particles of sand 
and clay, which, when acted upon by the currents, or surface agi- 
tation, form a deposit of tenacious clay; but in still water, where 
these causes do not act, mud is formed ; but it is only in the creeks 
where are no currents, and at such a depth as to be undisturbed by 
the waves, that the mud occurs. In Captain Smyth’s chart of the 
bay, the nearest soundings to the mud indicate a depth of about 
three fathoms, which is about what a large ship would draw. A. 
ship, therefore, impelled by the force of a gale into a creek with a 
bottom such as has been described, would strike a bottom of mud 
into which the fore part would fix itself and be held fast, whilst the 
stern was exposed to the force of the waves.” 

_V. 42. ta rots Seopawras droxreivwor defines the object of Bovan, 
and circumscribes the infinitive. W. § 45.9.b; S. § 162. 3. 2. 
_ Of the rigor with which those were liable to be punished who were 
charged with the custody of prisoners, if the latter escaped from 
them in any way, we have had proof in 12, 19 and 16, 27. 

V. 43. It will be recollected that, according to the Roman cus- 
tom, each of the prisoners was chained to a particular soldier, who 
was his keeper. As to the relation of these soldiers to the cen- 
turion, see on v. 31.— ékdAveev adrods BovAnuaros. ‘Thus it hap- 
pened again (see v. 24) that Paul’s companions were indebted to 
their connection with him for the preservation of their lives. — 
arroppiyravras has a reciprocal sense. — éfcévar, to go forth, not from 
the ship, which is the force of dé in the participle just before, but 
from the sea émt rh yay. 

V. 44. rovs Aourovs is the subject of e&séva, repeated from the 
preceding clause. —émi caviow, upon boards, such probably as 
were in use about the ship, but not parts of it, which would con- 
found this clause with the next. — emi twov traév dnd rod mAoiov, upon 
some of the pieces from the ship, which they themselves tore away 
or which the surge had broken off. Most critics distinguish the 
two expressions in this manner. Kuinoel renders caviow tables. 


380 NOTES. [CHAP. XXVII. 44— XXVIII. 1. 


A few understand that term of the permanent parts of the vessel, 
and tiwev dws tov mdoiov of such things as seats, barrels, and the 
like, which were floating away from the wreck. But articles of 
this description they would be likely to have lost, or to have thrown 
into the sea before this time. — ovras, thus, i.e. in the two ways 
that have been mentioned. — diacwbjva. This was not the first 
peril of the kind from which the apostle had been delivered. In 
2 Cor. 11, 25, he says, “ thrice have I suffered shipwreck” ; and 
he recorded that several years before the present disaster. 





CHAPTER XXVIII. 


V.1-10. Their Abode during the Winter at Melite. 


V. 1. éwéyvacar, x. t. X., they ascertained (by intercourse prob- 
ably with the inhabitants) that the island is called Melite. That 
this was the modern Malta cannot well be doubted. An island 
with the same name, now Meleda, lies up the Adriatic on the 
coast of Dalmatia, which some have maintained to be the one 
where Paul was wrecked. Bryant defended that opinion. It is 
advocated still in Valpy’s Notes on the New Testament. The 
argument for that opinion founded on the name Adriatic has been 
already refuted in the remarks on 27,27. It has also been alleged 
for it, that no poisonous serpents are found at present on Malta. 
The more populous and cultivated state of the island accounts for 
their disappearance. Naturalists inform us that the extinction of 
such reptiles follows in the natural train of events as the aboriginal 
forests of a country are cleared up, or as the soil is otherwise 
brought under cultivation. It would be difficult to find a surface of 
equal extent in so artificial a state as that of Malta at the present 
day. ‘The positive reasons for the common belief as to the place of 
the shipwreck are, that the traditional evidence sustains it; that 
Malta lies in the track of a vessel driven by a northeast wind ; that 
the reputed locality of the wreck agrees with Luke’s account ; that 
the Alexandrian ship in which they reémbarked would very natu- 
rally winter there, but not at Meleda; and that the subsequent 
course of the voyage to Puteoli is that which a vessel would pursue 
in going from Malta, but not from the other place. Malta is sixty 


j 
j 
“a 
q 
4 





CHAP. XXVIII. 1, 2.] NOTES. 381 


miles from Cape Passero, the southern point of Sicily, and two 
hundred miles from the African coast. It is farther from the main 
land than any other island in the Mediterranean. It is seventeen 
miles in length, nine miles in its greatest breadth, and sixty miles 
in circumference. ‘The ancient capital bore the same name as the 
island, and occupied the site of the modern Valetta. 

V. 2. of d€ BdpBapox. The inhabitants are called barbarians 
with referenee to their language, which was not that either of 
the Greeks or Romans. They belonged to the Pheenician race, 
and spoke a Semitic dialect, most probably the Punic, i. e. the 
Phoenician as spoken by the people of Carthage. ‘The Hebrew 
language,” in its widest extent, says Hupfeld, “was the lan- 
guage not merely of the Hebrews, but of the other nations that 
inhabited Canaan, or Palestina, especially of the Pheenicians, so 
renowned as a commercial people in the ancient world, and of the 
Carthaginians descended from them. This is proved especially by 
the proper names of the Canaanites in the Bible, and of the Phe- 
nicians and Carthaginians in the classic writers, which are all 
formed in the Hebrew manner, and also by the remains of the Phe- 
nician and the Punic language on Phcenician monuments and in 
the classics, so far as these have been as yet deciphered.”* The 
Greeks and Romans who settled on the island at different times 
never introduced to any great extent their language or customs. — 
ov thy Tuxovcav. See on 19, 11.— apocedAdBorro, received to them- 
selves, or to their regard; comp. Rom. 14, 1 (De Wet.) ; not to 





* It has been frequently asserted that the ancient Punic is the basis of 
the language spoken by the native Maltese of the present day. That opin- — 
ion is incorrect. Malta, at the time of the Saracen irruption, was overrun 
by Arabs, from whom the common people of the island derive their origin. 
The dialect spoken by them is a corrupt Arabic, agreeing essentially with 
that of the Moors, but intermixed to a greater extent with words from the 
Italian, Spanish, and other European languages. The Maltese language ap- 
proaches so nearly to the Arabic that the islanders are readily understood in 
all the ports of Africa and Syria. Gesenius first investigated thoroughly 
this dialect in his Versuch tber die maltesische Sprache, etc. (Leipzig, 1810). 
He has given the results of this investigation in his Article on Arabien in 
Ersch and Gruber’s Encyklopadie. In his History of the Hebrew Lan- 
guage, he remarks that, although the ancestral pride of the Maltese them- 
selves may dispose them to trace back their language to the old Punic, yet 
it contains nothing which it is not far more natural to explain out of the 
modern Arabic, than to refer to so ancient a source. 


382 NOTES. [CHAP, XXVIII. 2, 3. 


their fire (Mey.).— did rv deriv tov eheorara, on account of the 
rain which came upon us (De Wet., Rob.); the present rain 
(Wetst., Eng. vers.). This remark in regard to the rain and cold 
disproves the assumption of some critics that it was a Sirocco wind, 
i.e. from the southeast, which Paul’s ship encountered. That 
wind does not continue to blow more than two or three days, and 
is hot and sultry even as late as the month of November. 

V. 8. cvorpéparros .... mdjjOos, Now Paul having collected a 


great number (a heap) of dry sticks, such as would naturally be, 


found among the rocks around the shore. — éyidva, a viper. The 
Greeks applied this term to that reptile in distinction from other 
serpents, as is evident from Aristot. Lib. I. c. 6: dAW’ of pev ardor 
doroxodow bpeis, 7 5° Exvdva pdvov Cworoke?. Vipers are the only vi- 
viparous serpents in Europe. It was remarked above that the viper 
is unknown in Malta at the present day. ‘ No person,” says Mr. 
Smith, “ who has studied the changes which the operations of man 
have produced on the Fauna (animals) of any country, will be sur- 
prised that a particular species of reptiles should have disappeared 
from that of Malta. My friend, the Rev. Mr. Landsborough, in his 
interesting excursions in Arran, has repeatedly noticed the gradual 
disappearance of the viper from that island since it has become 
more frequented. Mr. Lyell,* in quoting the travels of Spix and 
Martius in Brazil, observes: ‘They speak of the dangers to 
which they were exposed from the jaguar, the poisonous serpents, 
crocodiles, scorpions, centipedes, and spiders. But with the in- 


creasing population and cultivation of the country, say these natu- 


ralists, these evils will gradually diminish ; when the inhabitants 
have cut down the woods, drained the marshes, made roads in all 
directions, and founded villages and towns, man will, by degrees, 
triumph over the rank vegetation and the noxious animals.’ ” 
ris O€puns, from the heat, the effect of it. A few good manuscripts 
read ad, a more exact preposition for that sense; comp. 20, 9; 
Luke 19, 3. This is the common view of the expression, to which 
De Wette also adheres. It may also mean from the heat, the place 
of it, as explained by Winer (§ 51. 5. b), Meyer, and some others. 
éx is kept nearer in this way to its ordinary force. The viper 
had evidently been taken up among the sticks which Paul had 
gathered ; and, as may be inferred from émOévros emi tiv mupav, had 


3 
mrad) 3 | 





* Principles of Geology (7th ed.), p. 655. 


a ae a ee ee ee ee eS ee ae 


CHAP. XXVIII. 3, 4.] NOTES. 383 


been thrown with them into the fire. This latter supposition is re- 
quired by the second sense of é« rijs Oépyns, and is entirely con- 
sistent with the first. The viper was probably in a torpid state, 
and was suddenly restored to activity by the heat. It was now 
cold, in consequence both of the storm and the lateness of the season 
(v. 2); and such reptiles become torpid as soon as the temperature 
falls sensibly below the mean temperature of the place which they 
inhabit. Vipers, too, lurk in rocky places, and that is the character 
of the region where the incident occurred. They are accustomed, 
‘also, to dart at their enemies, sometimes several feet at a bound; 
and hence the one mentioned here could have reached the hand of 
Paul as he stood in the vicinity of the fire.* — xadje, fastened it- 
self, in the sense of the middle. This reflexive use of the active 
occurs only here, which accounts for xaéjyaro, as read in some 
copies. 

V. 4. as 8, x. r.d., Now as the barbarians saw the animal 
hanging from his hand, to which it clung by the mouth. Aristotle 
also uses Onpiov of the viper. That it was ‘“‘ venomous” (Eng. 
vers.) results, not from this mode of designation, but from éy:dva. 
Luke does not say expressly that Paul was bitten; but the nature 
of the reptile, the leap, the clinging to his hand, leave us to in- 
fer that with almost entire certainty. ‘Those who stood near and 
witnessed the occurrence supposed evidently that such was the 
fact. That he should have escaped being bitten under such cir- 
cumstances would have been hardly less miraculous than that the’ 
ordinary effect of the poison should have been counteracted. _We 
seem to be justified, according to either view, in regarding his 
preservation as a fulfilment of. the promise of Christ in Mark 16, 
17. 18. On the form of xpeydpevov, see K. § 179. 5.— qoveds .... 
otros. They perceived from his chain, perhaps, or some other in- 
dication, that Paul was a prisoner. The attack of the viper proved 
to them that he must have committed some atrocious crime. qovevs 
points, not to a specific offence, but to the class of offenders to 
which they supposed he might belong. — 7 di«n (qv odk ciaver, justice 
suffered not to live. Observe the past tense. ‘They consider his 
doom as sealed. Vengeance, in their view, had already smitten its 
victim. 





* For the information in this Note concerning the habits of the viper, I 
‘am indebted chiefly to Professor Agassiz of Cambridge. 


384 NOTES. [CHAP. XXVIII. 5—7. 


V.5. enradev oddév xaxév. This statement agrees with the sup- 
position either that he had not been bitten, or that the poison had 
produced no effect upon him. 

V. 6. adrév pedrew mipmpacba, that he would be inflamed (lit. 
burn), since inflammation is attended with heat. — xcaraminrew advo 
vexpov, that he would suddenly fall down dead. Sudden collapse 
and death ensue often from the bite of serpents. Shakspeare 
speaks as a naturalist when he says of the asp-bitten Cleopatra, 


“Trembling she stood, and on the sudden dropped.” 


— pndev droroy, nothing bad, injurious ; in a moral sense, in Luke 
23, 41. — peraBadrrAdpeve may take after it tiv yrouny or omit it. — 
Oesv adrdv etva. ** Aut latro, inquiunt, aut deus; sic modo tauri, 
modo lapides (14, 13. 19). Datur tertium ; homo Det.” (Bng.) 

V.7. 16 pore tis moov. There can be no doubt that Publius 
is called the first (or chief) of the island because he was the Ro- 
man governor. Melite was first conquered by the Romans during 
the Punic wars, and in the time of Cicero (4 Ver. c. 18) was 
annexed to the pretorship of Sicily. The pretor of that island 
would naturally have a legate or deputy at this place. ‘The title 
mparos, under which he is mentioned here, has been justly cited by 
apologetic writers, as Tholuck, Ebrard, Krabbe, Lardner, Paley, as 
a striking proof of Luke’s accuracy. No other ancient writer hap- 
pens to have given his official designation ; but two inscriptions, one 
-in Greek and the other in Latin, have been discovered in Malta, in 
which we meet with the same title employed by Luke in this pas- 
sage.* It is impossible to believe that Publius, or any other single 
individual, would be called the first man in the island, except by 
way of official eminence. It will be observed that the father of 
Publius was still living, and during his lifetime he would naturally 
have taken precedence of the son, had the distinction in this case 
been one which belonged to the family. Tradition places the resi- 
dence of Publius at Citta Vecchia, the Medina of the Saracens ; 
but as that town is in the centre of Malta, it would be hardly 
consistent with epi rév romoy éxeivov, though it is but a few miles 
to the interior from any part of the coast (see on v. 1). 





* « The one in Greek is supposed to form a votive inscription by a Ro- 
man knight, named Aulus Castricius, ‘first of the Melitans’ (rparos Me- 
Aeraiwy), to the emperor. The Latin inscription, on the pedestal of a col- 
umn, was discovered at Citta Vecchia, in excavating the foundation of the 
Casa del Magistrato, in 1747.” ; 








CHAP. XXVIII. 8=11.] NOTES. 385 


V. 8. svperois. The plural has been supposed to describe the 
fever with reference to its recurrent attacks or paroxysms. This is 
one of those expressions in Luke’s writings that have been supposed 
to indicate his professional training as a physician. See also 12, 23; 
13, 11; and especially the comparison (6 Spas abrod dot OpduBou 
aiparos karaBaivoyres) in his Gospel (22, 44). It is correct to at- 
tach to them that significancy. No other writer of the New Testa- 
ment exhibits this sort of technical precision in speaking of diseases. 
The disorder with which the father of Publius was affected was 
dysentery combined with fever. It was formerly asserted that a 
dry climate, like that of Malta, would not produce such.a disorder ; 
but we have now the testimony of physicians resident in that island, 
that it is by no means uncommon there at the present day. 

V. 10. of cai, who also, on their part, i. e. while they came and 
were healed of their maladies. — rodAais ripais éripnoav jas, honored 
us (viz. Paul and his companions) with many honors, courtesies. 
They were entertained with a generous hospitality, and distinguished 
by marks of special regard and kindness. Some render riyais re- 
wards or presents ; but the next clause appears to limit their recep- 
tion of the favors in question to the time of their departure and to 
the relief of their necessary wants. It is certain that they did not, 
even then, accept the gifts which were proffered to them as a 
reward for their services ; for that would have been at variance 
with the command of Christ in Matt. 10, 8. 


V. 11-16. Prosecution of the Journey to Rome. 


V. 11. pera tpeis pivas. The three months are the time that 
they remained on the island. They were probably the months of 
November, December, and January. The season may have ad- 
mitted of their putting to sea earlier than usual. — év mole mapa- 
xexetpaxdrt. Luke does not state why this vessel had wintered here. 
It is a circumstance which shows the consistency of the narrative. 
The storm which occasioned the wreck of Paul’s vessel had de- 
layed this one so long, that it was necessary on reaching Melite to — 
suspend the voyage until spring. —apaojpe Avooxotpos, with the 
sign Dioscuri, or distinguished by that sign, i. e. having images of 
Castor and Pollux painted or carved on the prow, from which im- 
ages the vessel was named. ‘This use of figure-heads on ancient 
ships was very common. See Dict. of Antt., Art. Insigne. Cas- 


tor and Pollux were the favorite gods of seamen, the winds and 
49 


386 NOTES. [CHAP. XXVIII. 11-13. 


waves being supposed to be specially subject to eceete | It is 
of them that Horace says (Od. 1. 12. 27-382): 
¢¢ Quorum simul alba nautis 
Stella refulsit, 
Defluit saxis agitatus humor ; 
Concidunt venti, fugiuntque nubes, 
Et minax (quod sic voluere) ponto 
Unda recumbit.”’ * 


mapaonuo may be a noun or an adjective. The former appears to 
have been most common in this application. The other construc- 
tion is easier as regards the dative, and is preferred by De Wette. 

V. 12. Supaxotcas, Syracuse. This city, the capital of Sicily, 
on the southeastern coast of that island, was about eighty miles 
north from Melite. It was built partly on the adjacent island of Orty- 
gia, and from that circumstance may have received its plural name. 
The modern Siracusa or Siragossa occupies only a part of the an- 
cient city, viz. Ortygia (Forbg.).—émeuetvapev. ‘They may have 
stopped here for trade, or in the hope of a better wind. 

V. 18. mepiedOdvres, having come around or about. ‘The sense 
of the preposition it is impossible to determine with certainty. One 
supposition is, that it refers to their frequent alteration of the ship’s 
course ; in other words, to their tacking, because the wind was un- 
favorable. Another is, that they were compelled by that cause to 
follow closely the sinuosities of the coast, to proceed circuitously. 
De Wette says, which is much less probable, that they may have 
gone around Sicily, or the southern extremity of Italy. — eis ‘Pryor, 
unto Rhegium, now Reggio, which was an Italian seaport, opposite © 
to the northeastern point of Sicily. Here they remained a day, 
when the wind, which had been adverse since their leaving Syra- 
cuse, became fair, and they resumed the voyage. — émvyevouevov 
vérov, a south wind having arisen on them ; comp. the compound 
participle in v. 2, and in 27, 20. The dative of the person is often 
expressed after émwi with this force ; see Herod. 8. 13. — deurepaio, 
on the second day; comp. John 11,39. This adverbial use of 
the ordinals is classical. K. § 264. 3. b. — «is Morwdovs. Puteoli, 
now Puzzeoli, was eight miles northwest from Neapolis, the mod- 
ern Naples. It derived its name from putei, being famous for the 
baths which abounded there. Its earlier Greek name was Avcxaidp- 





* See, also, Od. 1. 3. 2. 





CHAP. XXVIII. 13.] NOTES. 387 


xeta. It was the principal port south of Rome. Nearly all the 
Alexandrian and a great part of the Spanish trade with Italy was 
brought hither. The seventy-seventh Letter of Seneca gives a 
lively description of the interest which the arrival of the corn-ships 
from Egypt was accustomed to excite among the inhabitants of that 
town. . “The mole on which the apostle landed at Puteoli still 
stretches its ruins into the blue waters of the bay.. The remains 
of the Baian villas, whose marble porticos he then beheld glitter- 
ing in the sunset — his first specimen of Italian luxury — still are 
seen along the shore.” — Life and Letters of Paul. 

The voyage from Rhegium to Puteoli, which the Dioscuri accom- 
plished in less than two days, was about one hundred and eighty 
miles. ‘The passage, therefore, was a rapid one; but, as examples 
of the ancient rate of sailing show, not unprecedented. Herodo- 
tus states that a ship could sail seven hundred stadia in a day, and 
six hundred in a night, i. e. thirteen hundred in twenty-four hours, 
which would be at the rate of about one hundred and fifty English 
miles a day. Strabo says, that a voyage could be made from Sam- 
monium to Egypt in four days, reckoning the distance at five thou- — 
sand stadia, or about five hundred and seventy-three miles. This 
would be sailing one hundred and forty-three miles in twenty-four 
hours, or six miles an hour. Pliny mentions several voyages which 
would be considered very good in modern times. He says that the 
prefects Galerius and Babilius arrived at Alexandria, the former 
on the seventh, the latter on the sixth day, after leaving the Straits 
of Messina. He states, also, that passages were made, under 
favorable circumstances, from the Straits of Hercules to Ostia, in 
seven days; from the nearest port of Spain, in four; from the 
province of Narbonne, in three ; and from Africa, in two. Prob- 
ably the most rapid run mentioned by any ancient writer is that of 
Arrian, in his Periplus of the Euxine, who says that “ they got 
under way about daybreak,” and that by midday they had come 
more than five hundred stadia; that is, more than fifty geographical 
miles, which is at least eight miles an hour.* The mean of the 
foregoing examples is seven miles an hour; and if we suppose 





* I have relied for these statements, partly on Forbiger, and partly on 
Biscoe and Smith. The voyage of Cicero from Ephesus to Athens (men- 
tioned in the Note on 18, 19) should not be taken as an average one. It 
was retarded, as he himself intimates, by extraordinary delays. 


388 NOTES. [CHAP. XXVIII. 13-16. 


that the Dioscuri sailed at that rate, the passage would have re- 
quired only about twenty-six hours. This result agrees perfectly 
with Luke’s account; for he states that they left Rhegium on one 
day and arrived at Puteoli on the next. Their course, it will be 
observed, was nearly due north, and they were favored with a south 
wind. 

V. 14. éw avrois, with them; comp. 21, 4. W.§ 52.c.— 
jpepas érrd, a week; see on 20, 6. They had an opportunity to 
spend a Sabbath with the Christians there. The centurion granted 
this delay, not improbably, in order to gratify the wishes of Paul. 
— kal ovrws, k. t. X., and so, after the interval thus spent, i. e. then 
we went (not came) unto Rome. The verb has both senses. The 
incidents in v. 15 occur on the way thither. It is unnecessary to 
regard the remark as proleptic. 

V. 15. Two companies of the Christians at Rome went forth to 
meet the apostle; but separately and at different times. Hence the 
advanced party reached Appii Forum, about forty miles from Rome, 
before Paul appeared ; the later party met him at Tres Taberne, 
which was thirty miles from Rome. (Itiner. Antonin.) Other esti- 
mates (Itiner. Hieros.) place Appii Forum a few miles nearer to 
Rome. ‘This town was named from Appius Claudius Ceecus, who 
built the Appian Way. It lay on the border of the Pontine 
Marshes, and was the place where the canal-boat stopped, which 
travellers to Rome commonly took at Anxur or Tarracina, dis- 
tant about twenty miles, No doubt the centurion and his party 
availed themselves of this mode of conveyance. Horace (Sat. 
1. 5. 4) speaks of Appii Forum as “ full of boatmen,” who were 
engaged in forwarding passengers from the one place to the other. 
As Paul travelled on the Appian Way, he must have entered Rome 


through the Capenian Gate. Appii Forum and Tres Taberne 


were both on the Via Appia, which Paul would take at Capua. 

V. 16. 6 éxardvrapyos ..... otpatoreddpyn, the centurion delivered 
the prisoners to the commander of the camp, i.e. the pretorian 
camp, where the emperor’s body-guard was quartered. See Phil. 
1, 13. This camp or garrison had been built by Sejanus, the fa- 
vorite of ‘Tiberius, in the vicinity of the Porta Nomentana (Win.). 
Nearly all critics at present, as Olshausen, Anger, De Wette, 
Meyer, Wieseler, suppose this officer, i. e. the prefectus pretorio, 
to be meant here. The prisoners who were sent to Rome from 
the provinces were committed to his custody. There is a differ- 


~ ‘ rial foo eta =i dere 
ee ae a ee eae eee oe ca hee Oe 


a is eee te ee 





CHAP. XXVIII. 16.] NOTES. 389 


ence of opinion in regard to the article. The command of the 
pretorian guard was originally divided between two prefects, but 
during the reign of Claudius, Burrus Afranius, a distinguished Ro- 
man general, was appointed sole prefectus pretorio, and retained 
this office as late certainly as the beginning of A. D. 62. On his 
death the command was committed again to two prefects, as it had 
been at first, and this continued to be the arrangement until a late 
period of the empire. ‘The time of Paul’s arrival at Rome could 
not have been far from A. D. 62, as admits of being shown by an 
independent calculation (see Introd. § 6. 5). Wieseler* supposes 
T@ atparoreddpxn to refer to Burrus, as sole prefect at that time, and 
he urges the expression as a reason for assigning the apostle’s ar- 
rival to A. D. 62, or the year preceding. It is very possible that 
this view is the correct one. It would furnish a striking coincidence 
between Luke’s narrative and the history of the times. Yet, in 
speaking of the prefect, the writer may have meant the one who 
acted in this particular case, the one who took into his charge the 
prisoners whom the centurion transferred to him, whether he was 
sole prefect or had a colleague with him; comp. 24, 23. De 
Wette assents to Meyer in this explanation of the article. The ex- 
pression, as so understood, does not affirm that there was but one 
prefect, or deny it.— 71 dé MavAg, x. r. d., But it was permitted 
to Paul (i. e. by the prefect to whom he had been consigned) to 
dwell by himself, instead of being confined with the other prisoners, 
This was a favor which the Roman laws often granted to those who 
were not suspected of any very serious offence. The centurion, 
who had already acted so friendly a part towards the apostle, may 
have procured for him this indulgence, or it may have been owing 
to the terms in which Festus stated the accusation against him. — 
avy tT pvdrdoocortt adrév otpari@ty, with the soldier who guarded him, 
and to whom he was fastened by a chain. Different soldiers relieved 
each other in the performance of this office. Hence,as Paul states 
in Phil. 1, 13, he became, in the course of time, personally known 
to a great number of the preetorian soldiers, and through them to 
their comrades. The notoriety which he thus acquired served to 
make his character as a prisoner for the sake of the gospel more 
widely known, and thus to aid him in his efforts to extend the knowl- 
edge of Christ. To this result the apostle refers in Phil. 1, 12 sq. 





* Chronologie des apostolischen Zeitalters, u. s. w., p. 86. 


390 | NOTES. [cHAP. XXVIII. 17-21. 


V. 17-22. Paul has an Interview with the chief Men of the Jews 
at Rome. 


V. 17. ray “Iov8aiev are the unbelieving Jews, not the Jewish 
Christians. Their first men would be the rulers of the synagogue, 
or would include them. — évavriov governs the dative here, as in 
1 Thess. 2, 15; comp. 26, 9.—é& ‘Iepocodipov, from Jerusalem, 
whence he had been sent to Caesarea. — eis ras xeipas tov ‘Popaior, 
into the hands of the Romans, viz. Felix and Festus, who repre- 
sented their countrymen. The remark refers to them, as is evident 
from dvaxpivayres in the next verse. 

V. 19.  jvaykdoOnv émixadécacba Kaicapa, I was compelled to ap- 
peal unto Cesar; as his only resort in order to save himself from 
assassination or judicial murder; comp. 25, 9 sq. — ovx as, x. T. A., 
not as. having (i. e. because I had) any thing (as the motive for 
this appeal) to charge against my nation, viz. before the emperor. 
The apostle would repel a suspicion which he supposed it not un- 
natural for the Roman Jews to entertain; or, possibly, would deny 
an imputation with which the Jews in Palestine had actually as- 
persed him (Wiesl.). 

V. 20. 80a radrny odv rhyv airlay, On this account, therefore, viz. 
that his feelings towards the Jews were so friendly. — mapexddeoa 
ipas ideiv, I have called, invited, you that I might see you. Some 
supply éué as the object of ideiv, which destroys the unity of the 
sentence. — évexey ....Iopand, for on account of the hope of Israel, 
i. e. the hope of a Messiah which the nation entertained ; comp. 


26, 6. This clause is codrdinate with the one which precedes. It: 


states an additional reason why he had sought the present interview. 
— ri Gvow radrnv wepixesnar, I am compassed with this chain, have 
my arm bound with it. The construction is similar to that of 
the accusative after passive verbs; comp. mepixerras doOéveray in 
Heb. 5, 2. 

V. 21. ipets odre ypdupara, x. tr. X. This statement refers to 
their having received no official information, either written or oral, 
in regard to the circumstances under which Paul had been sent to 
Rome. Some have supposed the Jews to be insincere in this dec- 
laration, as if it was improbable that they should have been unin- 
formed in regard to so important an event. But we have no suffi- 
cient reason for calling in question their veracity. The Palestine 
Jews could hardly have foreseen the issue to which the case was so 


: 2 e rt 2 _ 
SS Pe ag oe ee ee 


CHAP. XXVIII. 21, 22.] NOTES. 391 


suddenly brought; and hence, before the apostle’s appeal, would 
have deemed it unnecessary to apprise the Jews at Rome of the 
progress of the trial. It is barely possible that they could have 
forwarded intelligence since the appeal had taken place. Paul de- 
parted for Italy evidently soon after he had appealed, and must 
have availed himself of one of the last opportunities for such a 
voyage which the season of the year allowed. Having spent the 
winter at Melite, he had proceeded to Rome at the earliest moment 
in the spring; so that in the ordinary course of things he must 
have arrived there in advance of any ship that might have left 
Palestine after navigation recommenced. — Repeat dmé tijs “Iovdaias 
after mapayevduevos. — tis trav adehpav, any one of the brethren, of 
our countrymen, i. e. as a special messenger, as a complainant. 

V. 22. d&odpev S€ rapa cod dkotoa, But (though in the absence 
of such information we offer no complaint) we deem it proper 
(Mey., Rob.) to hear from thee ; comp. 15,38. The verb may also 
mean we desire (De Wet., Eng. vers.), but is less common in that 
sense. — wept pev yap ths aipéoews tavrns, for concerning this sect of 
which Paul was known to be an adherent; and as that circumstance 
(yap) was not in his favor, they intimate that he was bound to vin- 
dicate himself from the reproach of such a connection. The Jews, 
it will be observed, in their reply to the apostle, abstain from any 
allusion to the Christians at Rome; indeed, they might have ex- 
pressed themselves in the same manner had no church existed 
there at this time, or had they been entirely ignorant of its exist- 
ence. ‘l’o understand them, however, as affirming that they had 
heard of the sect only by report, that they possessed no personal 
knowledge of any who were connected with it, is certainly unau- 
thorized. Baur* proceeds on this false assumption, and then repre- 
sents the passage as inconsistent with the Epistle to the Romans, 
which was written several years before this, and exhibits to us a 
flourishing church in the Roman metropolis. The peculiarity in 
the case is not by any means that the Jews denied that they were 
acquainted with those who held the Christian faith, but that they 
avoided so carefully any reference to the fact; what they knew 
was matter of general notoriety (mavrayod dyridéyerar); they decline 
the responsibility of asserting any thing on the ground of their own 





* Paulus, der Apostel, sein Leben und Wirken, seine Briefe und seine 
Lehre, p. 368 sq. 


392 NOTES. [CHAP, XXVIII. 22. 


personal knowledge. Various explanations have been given of this 
reserve on the part of the Jews. Olshausen’s hypothesis is, that the 
opposition between the Jewish Christians and the Jews had become 
such, before Claudius banished the latter from Rome, as to separate 
them entirely from each other; and consequently that the Christians 
there remained in fact unknown to the Jews who returned to Rome 
after the decree of banishment ceased to be in force. This view is 
improbable, and has found no supporters. ‘The opinion of many of 
the older critics, to which Tholuck * also has returned, is that the 
mparto. Tov "Idvdaiwv affected to be thus ignorant in regard to the Ro- 
man Christians ; that they wished to deceive the apostle, and uttered 
a direct falsehood when they told him that they had received no in- 
formation concerning him from the Palestine Jews. The best ac- 
count of this peculiarity, it appears to me, is that which Philippi 
has suggested in his recent Commentary on the Epistle to the Ro- 
mans.t The situation of the Jews at Rome, after their recent 
banishment by Claudius, was still critical and insecure. It was 
very important for them to avoid the displeasure of the government ; 
to abstain from any act or attitude that would revive the old charge 
against them of being quarrelsome or factious. They saw that 
Paul was regarded with evident favor by the Roman officers ; they 
had heard from him that the procurator would have acquitted him, 
but the obstinate Jews had compelled him to appeal to Cesar. 
Having had no intelligence from Judea, they might fear that their 
countrymen there had gone too far, and had placed it in the power 
of Paul to use the circumstance to the disadvantage of the Jewish 
cause at Rome. Hence they considered it advisable for the pres- 
ent to conciliate the apostle, to treat him mildly, to keep out of 
sight their own relations to the christian sect. ‘They say what was 
true. No special and express information had been forwarded to 
them respecting his person and the occurrence mentioned by him, 
and they knew that the sect had everywhere an evil name. But 
they suppress, as what they do not consider it necessary and expe- 
dient to avow, their own view in regard to the christian faith, and, out 
of fear of the Roman magistrates, would draw as little attention as 
possible to their hostile position towards the Christians. 





* Commentar zum Briefe Pauli an die Romer (1842), p. 14. 
+ Commentar Uber den Brief Pauli an die Rémer, von Friedrich A. 
Philippi (1848), p. xv. 


TiS ee eee 











CHAP. XXVIII. 23-28. ] NOTES. 393 


V. 23-29. His Second Interview with the Jews. 


V. 23. cis ri Eeviav, into his lodging. ‘The term implies 
(Hesych.) that it was a place where he was entertained as a guest 
(comp. Philem. 22) ; and those critics are right who distinguish it 
from the “hired house” mentioned in v. 30. The apostle, at 
first, as would be natural, was received into some one of the chris- 
tian families at Rome ; but after a time, for the sake probably of 
greater convenience or independence, he removed to apartments 
which would be more entirely subject to his own control. — m\eioves, 
more than on the former occasion. — reidov ....Inaov, 1. e. and per- 
suading them of the things concerning Jesus. For the double ac- 
cusative, see on 19,8. Here, too, the act of the participle refers 
to the speaker’s aim or object, without including the result. It may 
be inferred from what follows, that the greater part of those whom 
Paul addressed withstood his efforts to win them to the truth; 
comp. v. 25. 

V. 24. of pév and of 8€ distributes the Jews into opposite par- 
ties. The proportion which the one bore to the other we must 
gather from the drift of the narrative. 

V. 25. dovppevor S¢ dvres mpds GAAnAovs, And being discordant 
among one another. ‘This variance they may be supposed to have 
evinced by an open declaration of their different views, by the ex- 
pression of dissent and objection on the part of those who disbe- 
lieved. — eimovros rot TatAov piya év, Paul having said one word, 
at the time of their departure (De Wet.) ; not as the occasion of 
it (Mey.). It was one final, significant word, as opposed to many 
words ; comp. Luke 20, 3. — da ‘Hoaiov. See on 2, 16. 

V. 26. reyor, viz. Isa. 6, 9 sq., cited according to the Seventy. 
The passage is quoted also in Matt. 13, 14 sq. and John 12, 40.— 
’ For the Hebraistic dxoj dxovcere, see the Note on 4, 17. — od pi 
ouvqre may express the future result with more certainty than the 
future indicative. See on 13, 41. — For Brémovres Breere, see on 
ye” Maa | 

V.-28. ody, therefore, i.e. since ye are so hardened and incor- 
rigible. — avroi, they (emphatic), although they are heathen. — kat 
dxovcovra, also will hear it, viz. the message of this salvation. The 
object of the verb is implied in dweordaz. 


50 


394 NOTES. [ CHAP. XXVIII. 20, 31. 


V. 30, 31. The Condition of the Apostle during his Captivity. 


V. 30. %yewe, remained, which implies that Paul’s condition had 
changed at the time when Luke finished the history. Some critics 
deny the correctness of this inference ; but the better opinion af- 
firms it. Had the apostle been still in confinement, the writer 
_would have employed more naturally the present tense or the per- 
fect, instead of the aorist. See Introd. § 5.— dueriay odrnv, during 
two whole years, which would bring the narrative down to A. D. 
64. See Introd. § 6. 5. — & idm picbdpati, in his own hired house, 
i. e. hired at his own expense. In the bosom of a christian church, — 
the apostle could not have been destitute of the means of providing 
for such an expense. We learn, also, from Phil. 4, 14. 18, that 
during this captivity Paul received supplies from the church at 
Philippi. — dmedéexero, in its special sense, received gladly, because 
it afforded him such joy to preach the Gospel; comp. 15, 4; 
18, 27. ,. 

V. 31. dddcKxwv, sc. adrovs. The construction is similar to that 
in v. 23. — dkodvras, without molestation on the part of the Roman 
government.* According to the Roman laws, a citizen under arrest, 





* Agrippa the First was imprisoned in early life, at Rome. The account 
of his captivity confirms so entirely Luke’s account of the manner in which 
Paul was treated as a Roman prisoner, (so unlike our modern usages,) that 
it may not be amiss to mention some of the circumstances. We obtain the 
information from Josephus (Antt. 18. 6. 5sq.). Agrippa, on being arrested, 
was committed to Macro, the pretorian prefect, and confined in the pre- 
torian camp. He was there kept under a guard of soldiers, to one of whom 
he was chained (called his ovvderds). A particular centurion had the over- 
sight of the prisoner and the soldiers who guarded him. But the condition 
of those confined in this manner depended very much on the character of 
those who had the immediate charge of them. The soldiers who watched 
Agrippa treated him, at first, with great severity. Hence Antonia, a sister- 
in-law of Tiberius.and a friend of Agrippa, interceded with Macro and in- 
duced him to appoint a guard known to be of a milder disposition. The 
situation of Agrippa was now improved. His friends, who had been ex- 
cluded from him, were permitted to visit him and to supply his necessary 
wants (comp. 24, 23). But during this time, about six months, he was still 
confined in the pretorian camp. On the death of Tiberius the mode of his 
captivity was changed again. Caligula ordered him to be removed from 
the preetorium to the house which he had occupied before he was bound. 
Here he was still guarded as a prisoner, but was subject to so much less 














CHAP. XXVIII. 31.] NOTES. 395 


in ordinary cases, could give security or bail, and thus enjoy his 
personal liberty until he was brought to trial. The freedom granted 
to Paul was so ample, that one might almost suppose that he was 
permitted to exercise that right; but it is rendered certain by 
Phil. 1, 13. 16, that he continued to be guarded by a Roman 
soldier.* In regard to the abrupt termination of the book, see the 
remarks in the Introduction, p. 11. : 





restraint that his condition was one of comparative liberty. His captivity, 
in this last form of it, was doubtless like that of Paul during the two years 
that he “dwelt in his own hired house”’ at Rome. 

* As to what is known, or is probable, in regard to the subsequent history 
of the great apostle, see Appendix, No. 5. 





ERRATA. 


Tue following corrections should be made which affect the sense. The 
critical reader will overlook an occasional want of uniformity in the accentu- 
ation, or the orthography of a proper name. 


Page 27, line 29, for direct read indirect. 

te 31,:.¢ 8; * De Wet. © Hnr. 

vi 34, “ 27, uniformly “ generally. 

¢ 77, “ 32, * bought «¢ brought. 

“ 160, “ 5, “* proconsuls “  propretors. 

“« 269, “ 33, Second “Firat... 

« 330, lines 27, 34, and 35, for Festus read Felix. 


NAMES ABBREVIATED IN THE NOTES. 





/ 


Tue works of the writers to which reference is made are mostly 
Commentaries, and may be presumed to be well known. The 
titles of some of those which are less common have been given at 
the foot of the page where they occur for the first time. 


Ang. Anger. Hnr. Heinrichs. 
Bern. Bernhardy. Krig. Kruger. 
Bez. Beza. Kuin. Kuinoel. 
Blmf. Bloomfield. Kyp. Kypke. 
Bng. Bengel. Lachm. Lachmann. 
Bottg. Bottger. Light. Lightfoot. 
Bretsch. Bretschneider. Mey. Meyer. 
Brud. Bruder. Neand. Neander. 
Calv. Calvin. Olsh. Olshausen. 
Chryst. _ Chrysostom. Raph. Rapheel. 
De Wet. De Wette. Rob. Robinson. 
Doddr. Doddridge. Schottg. Schottgen. 
Ebr. Ebrard. Str. Stier. 
Forb. Forbiger. Suid. Suidas. 
Frtz. Fritzsche. Thol. Tholuck. 
Gesen. Gesenius. Tschdf. Tischendorf. 
Grot. Grotius. Vitr. Vitringa. 
Grsb. Griesbach. Wetst. Wetstein. 
Hems. Hemsen. Whi. Wahl. 
Heng. Hengstenberg. Wiesl. Wieseler. 
Hesych. Hesychius. Win. Winer. 


a 


er) A 


—— ! 











INDEX. 


Tue following Index is intended to exhibit the contents of the Notes as distinguished for 


the most part from the contents of the History. 


A. 


Abraham, not the oldest son of Te- 
rah, 101. 

Achaia, how applied by Luke, 254 ; 

_ interchanged with Hellas, 279. 

Acts of the Apostles, by whom writ 
ten, 1 sq.; authenticity of the 
book, 6 sq. ; its object and plan, 
9 sq.; when and where it was 
written, 10 sq.; why closed so 
abruptly, 11 sq.; its relation to 
Luke’s Gospel, 23. 

Adramyttium, its situation and pres- 
ent state, 348. 

Adriatic, how extensively applied, 
370. 

Agrippa the First, year of his death, 
13; his family, 164; his charac- 
ter, 165; circumstances of his 
death, 169 sq.; account of his 
imprisonment at Rome, 394 sq. 

Agrippa the Second, his history, 
333 ; object of his visit to Cesa- 
rea, 3343; turns off Paul’s appeal 
with a jest, 345. 

Akerman, Numismatic Illustrations, 
144, 234. 

Alms-distributers, cause of their ap- 
pointment, 92; not called dea- 
cons, 93. LS 

Amphipolis, on the military. road 
through the north of Greece, 
230. 

Ananias, nature of his crime, 79 ; 
why punished with such severity, 

. Sl sq. 





Ananias, (high-priest,) to be distin~ 
guished from Annas, 315; was 
the actual high-priest, 316. 

Andriaca, port of Myra, 352. 

Angels, import of their address in 
1, 11 obscure, 27; their agency 
in the giving of the law, 116; 
were supposed to be the guardians 
of men, 168. 

Le acd its import as a symbol, 

5. 

Antioch in Syria, by whom built, 
the seat of missionary operations, 
160 ; its harbor, 173; visited by 
Paul four times, 262. 

Antioch in Pisidia, on the central 
table-land of Asia Minor, 180; 
discourse of Paul in the syna- 
gogue, 181; may have been vis- 
ited on the apostle’s second mis- 
sionary tour, 218. 

Antipatris supposed to be the mod- 
ern Kefr Saba, 323; how far 
from Jerusalem, 323 ; its site not 
certainly known, 324. 

Antonia, castle of, 304; Paul’s 
speech from the stairs, 307 sq. 
Apollonia on the way from Philippi 

to Thessalonica, 230. 

Aposiles, what was necessary to 
their office, 25, 27; main point 
of their testimony, 34; not lim- 
ited to twelve, 36; were not ig- 
norant that the gospel was to be 
preached to the heathen, 53 ; re- 
linquished the Jewish rites by de- 
grees, 57; acknowledged a high- 


400 


er law than that of men, 73, 85 
sq., 224; did not insist on a com- 
munity of goods, 79; were em- 
powered to confer the ‘Spirit, 122 ; 
aimed in their missionary policy to 
secure the chief towns, 218, 254. 

Appit Forum, 388. 

Aquila, where he was converted, 
254 ; his frequent change of resi- 
dence, 255; his connection with 
Apollos, 263. 

Areiopagus, in what part of Athens, 
238; Paul not tried before the 
coust of this name, 239; outline 
of his speech there, 241 sq. 

Aretas took possession of Damascus, 
12 sq.; assisted the Jews to cap- 
ture Paul, 139. 

Aristarchus accompanied Paul to Je- 
rusalem, 280; in what sense his 
‘* fellow-prisoner,”’ 349. 

Artemon, what sail intended, 377; 
its effect on a vessel, 378. 

Asia, how much it included, in the 
Acts, 41; rapid extension of the 
gospel there, 267; may denote 
Asia Minor, 349. 

Asiarchs, their office, and occasion of 
their friendship for Paul,.274. 

Assos, its situation, 283; Paul’s 
foot-journey thither, 284. 

Athens, how far from Berea, 234; 
extent of its idolatry, 235; had 
but one agora, 236; character of 
its inhabitants, 236 sq. ; origin of 
its altar **to an unknown god,”’ 
245 sq. ; visited by the apostle but 
once, 254. 

Altaleia, distance from Perga, 179 ; 
its site described by Beaufort, 203. 

Augustan cohort, 347. 


B. 


Baptism, administered in the name 
of Christ, 53; that of Cornelius 
and other heathen, 156; that of 
Lydia and her household, 221; 
how it was performed in the jail 
at Philippi, 227; how that of 
John differed from that of the 
apostles, 263; was repeated in 
the case of certain disciples at 
Ephesus, 266; was the sign of 
repentance and faith, 310. 





INDEX. 


Barnabas, signification of his name, 
78; his influence at Jerusalem, 
139; his interview with Paul at 
Tarsus, 161; accompanies the 
apostle in his first missionary tour, 
171; why he was called Jupiter 
at Lystra, 196 ; went as a dele- 
gate to J erusalem, 204; his dis- 
agreement with Paul, and their 
subsequent relations to each other, 
215; the letter ascribed to him 
not genuine, 216. 
Bernice, facts in her history, 334. 
Berea, its distance from Thessaloni- 
ca, on what river, present name, 
233. 
Bethany, the scene of the Ascen- 
sion, 28. 
Boeckh on the mode of undergirding 
ancient ships, 364. 
Bishops, the same as presbyters, 
202. 
Bithynia, not entered by Paul, 218 ; 
the persecution there under 'T'ra- 
jan, 341. 


C. 

Cesarea, its importance in Jewish 
history, 131; the seaport of Ju- 
dea, 261; how often Paul .was 
there, 296. 

Candace, mentioned in the classics, 
126; the name of a dynasty, 
127. 

Candor of the sacred writers, 155, 
274, 334. 

Captain of the temple, 67. 

Cemeteries, signification of the word, 
118; first used by Christians, 118. 

Chios, an island in the Adgean, 284. 

Chrestus, an instigator of the Jews 
at Rome, 255. 

Christ made his resurrection certain 
to his disciples, 25; was omnis- 
cient, 34; in what capacity he 
reigns as Mediator, 52; miracles 
were wrought in his name, 58, 
71, 143; is the author of- natural 
and spiritual life, 60; his final 
coming described as near, because 
it is near to a true christian con- 
sciousness, 63 sq.; was wor- 
shipped by the first disciples, 118, 
136, 150; is the final Judge of 


INDEX. 


men, 156, 252 sq.; fulfilled the 
prophecies, 183, 231. 

Christians, origin and import of the 
name, 161 sq. 

Chronology, why that of the Acts 
still difficult, 12; dates that may 
be established, 12 sq.; computed 
by the Jews in different ways, 

103 ; on what principle we are to 

judge of the accuracy of chrono- 

ogical designations, 182. 

Cilicta, why named always after 
Syria, 140. 

Citizenship, Roman, immunities 
which it secured, 228; seldom 
claimed falsely, 313; how ac- 
quired by foreigners, 314. 

Claude, now Gozzo, 362; distance 
from the point of Koura, 371. 

Claudius, the famine in his reign, 
163 ; his banishment of the Jews, 
255; restored Achaia to the Sen- 
ate, 258. 

Clergy, origin of the term, 31. 

Cnidos, name of a town and prom- 
ontory, 354; ruins which exist 
there, 354. 

Coincidences between the Acts and 
the Epistles, 193, 198, 199 sq., 
212, 269, 270, 279, 287, 288, 289, 
290, 291, 311, 328; between the 
Acts and Josephus, 89, 101, 151, 
165, 169 sq., 318, 325, 330, 331, 
336, 347; between the Acts and 
Philo, 101, 116, 320; between 
the Acts and the classical writers, 
126, 176, 221, 228, 235, 241,244, 
255, 258, 267, 331, 336, 346. 

Coins still extant, of Cyprus, 176; 
of Philippi, 220; of Berea, 234; 
of Nyssa, 276; of Ephesus, 276, 
277; of Tarsus, 307; of Adra- 
myttium, 348. 

Conybeare and ‘Howson, value of 
their work on the Life and Let- 
ters of Paul, 160. 

Corinth, how far distant from Ath- 
ens, 254 ; how long Paul remained 
there, 257 ; made a second jour- 
ney thither which is not recorded, 
278 ; his third journey, 279. 

Cornelius, not a Jewish proselyte, 
145 ; nature of the homage which 
he offered to Peter, 149; time of 
his conversion, 158; in what 


51 





401 


sense he was the first convert 
from heathenism, 206. 

Cos or Co, its situation, 294; why 
now called Stanchio, 294. 

Crete, 354; has good harbors on the 
north side, 355. 

Cyprus, visited by Paul on his first 
tour, 174; traversed by a good 
road, 175; governed by a procon- 
sul, 176; left to the windward on 
Paul’s voyage to Rome, 351. 


D. 


Damascus, its situation, 132 ; labors 
of Paul there, 137 sq. ; 

Davidson, his Introduction to the 
New Testament cited, 3, 7, 107; 
his Lectures on Biblical Criticism, 
289. 

Dembra, modern name of Myra, 
352. 

Demetrius, his occupation, 271 ; his 
artful speech, 272. 

Derbe, near the base of the Black 
Mountain, 193; remarkable ruins 
still found there, 194; why not 
mentioned in the Second Epistle 
to Timothy, 199; why named be- 
fore Lystra, 216. . 

Diana, use made of her shrines, 
271; how extensively worshipped, 
272; repeating her name a relig- 
ious act, 275 ; tradition as to the 
origin of her image, 276. 

Diospolitans, an Egyptian dynasty, 
107. 

Drusilla, her family, and facts in her 
history, 330. 


E. 


Egyptian impostor referred to by 
Lysias, 305 ; how Luke’s account: 
of him may be reconciled with 
that of Josephus, 306. 

Elders. See Presbyters. 

Elymas, the Magian, introduced so 
as to present a true picture of the 
times, 175; origin of his name, 
177. 

Ephesus, Paul’s first visit there, 261 ; 
his return, 265 ; residence of the 
proconsul, 277. 

Epicureans, the ‘‘ minute philoso- 


402 


_ phers of their day,’’ 236; their | 


principles, 237. 

Epistles of Paul, when and where 
written: those which he sent from 
Rome, 19; the First and Second 
to the Thessalonians, 260; that 
to the Galatians, 267; the First 
to the Corinthians, 269 ; the Sec- 
ond to the Corinthians, 278; that 
to the Romans, 279. 

Kitliopia, of what country the name, 
126; the gospel preached there 
at an early period, 130. 

Ethiopian eunuch, his country and 
rank, 126; why he was reading 
the prophecies, 127; traditional 
scene of his baptism, 129; his re- 
puted name, 130. 

Evangelist, application of this term, 
296. 


F. 


Fair Havens, on the south of Crete, 
355; the council held there, 357. 

Famine foretold by Agabus, 162; 
how extensive, and when it oc- 
curred, 163. 

Felix, when recalled from office, 14 ; 
his character, 321, 325; how long 
he was procurator, 327;  at- 
tempted to bribe Paul, 331. 

Felton, Prof., his opinion on a pas- 
sage in Arrian, 359. 

Festus, when appointed procurator, 
14 sq.; his object in wishing to 
send Paul to Jerusalem, 332; 
Luke describes him in accordance 
with history, 336; why he con- 
ferred with his council, 333. 


G. 


Gaius, different persons of thisname, 
273, 280. 

Galatia, not visited on Paul’s first 
mission, 194; when the gospel 
was first preached there, 218 ; 
why named before Phrygia, 262. 

Gailio, his character correctly drawn, 
258; carried his impartiality too 
far, 259. 

Gamaliel, how described in the Tal- 
mud, 87; alleged anachronism in 
his speech, 88; singular character 
of his advice, 90. 

Gate, the Beautiful, its situation, 57 





INDEX. 


sq.; Capenian, the one through 
which Paul entered Rome, 388 ; 
Nomentana, in the vicinity of the 
prefect’s carnp, 388. . 

Gaza, when destroyed by the Ro- 
mans, 125; the roads which lead 
thither, 126. 

Gehenna, how understood by the 
Jews, 30. 

Gentiles, their acceptance of the 
gospel foretold by the prophets, 
54, 209. 

Geography of Asia Minor still im- 
perfectly known, 194. 
Gesenius, his view of the Maltese 

language, 381. 

Gift of tongues, how conferred on 
the day of Pentecost, 37; object 
of the endowment, 38; the mira- 
cle unquestionable, 39; why de- 
scribed so concisely, 157. 

Gospel, universality of its design, 
154; first preached to the heathen, 
160 ; characterized as a system of 
grace, 189 ; why subverted by the 
Jewish attachment to circumcis- 
ion, 204. 

Greek Language, used with great 
purity by Luke, 4; spoken ex- 
tensively in Palestine, 100; fur- 
nished a medium of intercourse 
between different nations, 196, 
305. 


H. 


Haliacmon, a river at whose mouth 
Paul embarked for Athens, 234. 
Heathen, described as those ‘‘ afar 
off,’ 53; have sufficient light to 
create obligation, 198, 250, 251; 
acknowledge blindly the existence 
of God, 246; have no excuse for 
their idolatry, 250; must repent 
to be prepared for the judgment, 
252. 

Hebraisms, 27, 63, 65, 79, 86, 109, 
110, 111, 136, 209, etc. 

Hebron, whether confounded by 
Stephen with Sychem, 106. 

Hellenists, how distinguished from 
Greeks, 92; why Paul labored 
specially for them, 140. 

Herod Antipas, his war with Aretas, 
13; his exile on the banks of the 
Rhone, 172. 


INDEX. 


Holy Spirit, why expressed often 
without the article, 24; inspired 
those who wrote the Scriptures, 
30; his agency characteristic 
of the new economy, 45; be- 
stowed on the apostles, 76, 79; 
resisted by the Jews, 116; in 
what sense unknown to John’s 
disciples, 265; qualified religious 
teachers for their office, 217, 289. 

Horeb, why interchanged with Sinai 
as an equivalent designation, 110. 

Humphry, his Commentary quoted, 
190, 295, 298, 307. 

Hupfeld, on the prevalence of the 
Hebrew language, 381. 


I. 


Iconium, how far from Antioch, 
191; described by Leake, 191. 
Inscriptions that corroborate Luke’s 
history: one given by Gruter, 
144; one found at Thyatira, 221; 

two in Malta, 384. 

Italian cohort, why so named, 144 ; 
why stationed at Caesarea, 145; 
may be identical with the Augus- 
tan, 348. 


a. 


Jacob, the number in his family on 
his descent into Egypt, 104 sq. 
Jailer at Philippi, how we may 
view the circumstances of his con- 

version, 226. 

Jerusalem, how often visited by 
Paul after his conversion, 262, 
298 ; why he supposed it to be 
his proper field of labor, 311. 

Jews could not inflict capital punish- 
ment, 117.; way in which they 
instigated the heathen against the 
Christians, 191, 192 ; enjoyed re- 
ligious toleration, 223, 259; were 
hated by the Greeks, 259; held 

- that the end justifies the means, 
320; their singular reserve in the 
interview with Paul at Rome, 
391$sq. 

Joel, his prophecy (3,1-5) ex- 
plained, 43 sq. 

Joppa, how far from Lydda, 142; 
its present name, 143. 

Judas the Galilean, the place of his 
birth, 89 ; ground of his opposi- 





403 


tion to the Roman government, 
90. 

Judas the traitor, his end well known 
at Jerusalem, 31; no inconsisten- 
cy in the different accounts of his 
death, 32. 

Julius, his kindness to Paul, 350. 


K. 


Kefr Saba, the supposed site of An- 
tipatris, 323. 

Kingdom of God, sense of the 
phrase, 200. 

Kirchhofer, his Work on the New 
Testament Canon, 1.. 

Konieh, 191. 

Koura, a point at the entrance of 
St. Paul’s Bay, 371; the scene 
of a modern shipwreck, 371. 

Kurtz, his article on ‘* The Angel of 
the Lord,’’ 110. 


L. 


Lasea, its site unknown, 355. 

Latinisms in the Greek of the New 
Testament, 162, 267, 306. 

Libertines, who they were, 94. 

Lucian, his account of the ship 
driven into the Pireus, 375. 

Luke, the writer of the Acts, 1; 
peculiarities of his style, 3; 
sketch of his life, 4 sq.; value 
of his testimony as a physician, 
5; examples of his accuracy as an 
historian, 144, 164, 176, 223, 232, 
236, 258, 324, 384 ; has not shown 
himself ignorant of Jewish cus- 
toms, 150 sq.; his first connec- 
tion with Paul, 219; writes as 
an eyewitness, 224, 282, 295; 
abounds in the use of nautical 
terms, 353; traces of his medical 
profession, 385. 

Lycaonia, its extent, 193. 

Lycaonian dialect, what is known of 
it, 196. 

Lystra, its bearing from Iconium, 
193 ; its exact position not fixed, 
194. 


M. 


Macedonia, how apptied by the 
Greeks, 220; its Roman signifi- 
cation, 256. 


404 


Madiam, or Midian, where situated, 
109. 

Manaen, in what sense ‘‘ brought 
up with Herod,’’ 172. 

Marches, how rapidly performed by 
ancient armies, 323. 

Mark, his relationship to Barna- 
bas, 171; in what capacity he 
attended Paul, 174; his abrupt 
return from the mission, 179 ; re- 
gained the apostle’s confidence, 
215. 

Markets, the resort of loungers, 
232; courts held in them, 232, 
276. 

Martyr, how distinguished in sense 
from witness, 310. 

Meleda, not the island where Paul 
was wrecked, 380, 

Melite, why not recognized by the 
mariners, 376; the island where 
Paul was wrecked, 380; its ex- 
tent, 381; annexed to the pretor- 
ship of Sicily, 384. 

Miletus, how far from Ephesus, 
284; address of Paul there to the 
Ephesian elders, 285. 

Miracles, how designated, and import 
of the terms, 48; what rendered 
those at Ephesus remarkable, 267. 

Mitylene, 284. 

Moloch, how to be understood in 
Stephen’s speech, 113. 

Movers, his explanation of Remphan, 
113. 

Myra, its situation, the ruins found 
there, 352. 


N. 


Navigation, in what part of the year 
commenced and closed by the an- 
cients, 356 ; how regulated at a 
distance from the land, 368. 

Nazarites, rules to which they were 
subject, 260, 301 ; their expenses 
defrayed often by others, 301. 

Neapolis, whether Paul landed there, 
220. 


0. 


Omissions in the Acts show the 
history to be independent of the 
Epistles, 224. 

Ordination of Timothy, 217. 





INDEX. 


Orontes connected Antioch with the 
sea, 173. 

Oriental Customs : laying gifts at the 
feet of kings, 77; imposition of 
hands, 93; uncovering the feet, 
110; shaking off the dust of the 
feet, 191; rending the garments, 
197 ; throwing dust into the air, 
312; silence enjoined by striking 
on the mouth, 316, 

Ortygia, 386. 


ee: 


Paphos, what place of this name in- 
tended, 175. 

Parthia, its boundaries, 40. 

Patara, for what celebrated, de- 
scribed by Beaufort, 294. 

Paul, year of his conversion, 12 ; 
how long he remained in Arabia, 
138; mode of his journey from 
Cesarea to Tarsus, 140; how 
long he remained in Syria and 
Cilicia, 141; in what year he 
made his second visit to Jerusa- 
lem, 171; why his name was 
changed from Saul to Paul, 177; 
encountered ‘‘ perils of rivers ”’ 
and “perils of robbers,’’ in the 
Pisidian highlands, 179 sq. ; how 
long he was absent on his first 
mission, 203 ; his relation to Bar- 
nabas after their separation, 215 ; 
year in which he departed on his 
second mission, 216; on what 
principle he cireumcised Timothy, 
217 ; why he neglected to plead 
his Roman citizenship at Philippi, 
228; whether he was tried before 
the court of the Areiopagus, 239 ; 
the trade at which he wrought, 
255 ; how long he was absent on 
his second tour, 262; characteris- 
tic of him that he refers so often 
to his own example, 287; dura- 
tion of his third missionary tour, 
299; his attempt to conciliate 
the Jewish believers justifiable, 
300 ; at what age he entered the 
school of Gamaliel, 308 ; how he 
acquired his Roman citizenship, 
314; noble-minded confession of 
his error, 317; was not a member 
of the Sanhedrim, 340;. manner 
in which he replied to the charge 


INDEX. 


of insanity, 344; his calmness 
amid the tempest, 369; his as- 
cendency over others, 370; his 
condition while he was a prisoner 
at Rome, 394. 

Pentecost, of what commemorative, 
36; how long it continued, 303. 
Perga, Paul’s course thither, 178; 
its site described by Sir C. Fel- 

lows, 179. 

Peter, an affinity between his speech- 
es and his Epistles, 7; why he 
represented the pardon of Simon 
as doubtful, 124; had not the or- 
dinary Jewish prejudices, 144; 
how he regarded the homage 
of Cornelius, 149 sq.; devolved 
baptism on his assistants, 157 ; 
manner in which he was chained, 
166; in what sense he first 
preached to the heathen, 206; at 
what time he arrived at Antioch, 
262. 

Pharisees, their opinions, 318 ; rep- 
resented as strict by Josephus, 338. 

Philip, in what city. of Samaria he 
preached, 120; his residence at 
Cesarea, 130; why he was called 
an Evangelist, 296. 

Philippi, its rank as a city, 220; 
few Jews resided there, 221; 
why its magistrates were called 
pretors, 223; character of the 
church there, 230. — 

Philippi, Prof., his mode of account- 
ing for the silence of the Jews in 
regard to the Roman Christians, 
392. 

Pheniz, its situation, 357 ; direction 
in which its harbor opened, 358 ; 
Mr. Smith’s view untenable, 359. 

Phrygia, 41. 

Possession, demoniacal, distinguished 
from ordinary disease, 83, 120. 
Prayer, at what hours offered by 
the Jews, 43, 57; was addressed 
to Christ by the first disciples, 34, 
136; the attitude in which it was 
offered, 293; was the means of 
saving Paul’s companions in the 

ship, 370. 

Presbyters, how elected, 200 ; Nean- 
der’s view, 201; origin of the 
term, 202; same as bishops, 285. 

Priests, divided into classes, 67; 
distinguished from Levites, 78. 





405 


Prisoners, in what manner they 
were chained, 166; were subject 
to different degrees of rigor, 330, 
331, 394; sometimes wore their 
chains when on trial, 346; were 
often sent to Rome from the proy- 
inces, 347; were committed to 
the pretorian prefect, 398. 

Proconsuls, how distinguished from 
propretors, 176. 

Prophets, how related to teachers, 
172. 

Provinces divided into imperial and 
senatorian, 176. 

Psalms explained, (69, 25), 33; 
-(16, 8-11), 49 sq.; (118, 22), 
71; (2, 1.2), 74 sq. 

Ptolemais, situation and modern 
name, 296. 

Publius, his title confirmed by in- 
scriptions lately found, 384. 

Puteoli, its situation, 386; entry- 
port of the wheat-ships, 387. 


Q. 

Quotations from the Old Testament, 
how applied sometimes in the 
New, 33; with what degree of 
verbal accuracy made, 43 sq., 113, 
188, 209; why conformed to the 
Septuagint, 127, 209. 


R. 


Readings, various, occur in the Acts, 
50, 66, 129, 133, 214, 289, 296, 
326, 361; many of them unim- 
portant, 336. 

Redemption effected chiefly by the 
death of Christ, 289. 

Repentance, a divine gift, 86, 159, 
221; required of those who re- 
ceived baptism, 183. 

Resurrection, that of Christ ascer- 
tained confidently by his disciples, 
25; denied by the Sadducees, 
67; excited the ridicule of the 
Athenians, 253 ; effect of the be- 
lief of it on the mind of Paul, 328. 

Revealer, under the ancient dispen- 
sation, identical with the Logos, 
110. 

Rhegium, now Reggio, 386; dis- 
tance to Puteoli, 387. 

Rhodes, 294. 


406 


Robinson, his description of Mars’ 
Hill, 238; of the castle of An- 
tonia, 304. 


w 


S. 


Sabbath, Christian,"traces of its ob- 
servance in the New Testament, 
281; rests on apostolic institu- 
tion, 282. 

Sadducees, their principles, 67, 318. 

Salamis, the scenery there on which 
the eyes of Paul looked, 174 ; its 
modern name, 336. 

Salmone, the eastern promontory of 
Crete, 354; an island in St. 
Paul’s Bay, 378. 

Samothrace, 219. 

Sanhedrim, its organization, 69 ; 
its proceedings public, 70, 72; 
place of session, 96; different 
modes of designation, 74, 131; 
extent. of its power, 131; qualifi- 
cations of its members, 340. 

Seleucia, the great seaport of north- 
ern Syria, 173; appearance of 
the country from the bay, 174. 

Sergius Paulus, his office, 175 ; his 
title confirmed as correct, 176. 

Ships, ancient, their size, 353, 374 
sq.; how they were undergirded, 
363 sq.; were easily shattered, 
367; could anchor by the stern, 
372; were steered with two rud- 
ders, 377; depended for speed 
chiefly on one sail, 378; had 
figure-heads, 385; how rapidly 
they could sail, 387. 

Sidon, its harbor, its distance from 
Cesarea, 350. 

Simon, the Magian, character of 
his pretensions, 121; exposure of 
his hypocrisy, 122 ; whether iden- 
tical with a certain other Simon, 
124, 

Simony, how the word arose, 123. 

Smith, E., his visit to Antipatris, 
323. 

Smith, J., his work on “* The Voy- 
age and Shipwreck of St. Paul,”’ 
349. 

Solomon’s Porch, why so called, 59. 

Sonntag, his explanation of the dif- 
ficulty in regard to Theudas, 88 


sq. 
Stephen, nature of the accusation 








INDEX, 


against him, 95 sq. ; analysis of his 
speech, 97; Neander’s analysis, 
98; that of Luger and Baur, 99 ; 
was probably a Hellenist, 100; 
difficulties in his discourse ex- 
amined, 101, 103, 104, 106, 113; 
his dying prayer, 118; not the 
only witness whose blood was 
shed, 340. 

Stoics, the tendency of their philoso- 
phy, 237. 

Stuart, Prof., his Interpretation of 
the sixteenth Psalm, 49; his view 
of Christ as Mediator, 52. 

Synagogues, how numerous at Je- 
rusalem, 95; their officers, 132; 
punishment inflicted in them, 340. 

Syracuse, how far from Melite, 386. 


as 


Tarsus, its literary eminence, 140 ; 
its political importance, 307; did 
not possess the rights of Roman 
citizenship, 314. 

Temple, how its services were per- 
formed, 67; its destruction fore- 
told by Stephen, 95 ; constructed 
so as to shadow forth spiritual 
truths, 114 ; regarded with exces- 
sive veneration by the Jews, 115 ; 
portion of it interdicted to foreign- 
ers, 303. 

Tertullus, his gross flattery, 325. 

Theatres, used among the Greeks 
for public business, 170, 273. 

Theophilus, a representative of those 
for whom Luke wrote, 9; his 
rank and country, 23. 

Thessalonica, its distance from Phi- 
lippi, 230; result of Paul’s labors 
there, 231; how long he re- 
mained, 233. 

Theudas, why not mentioned by Jo- 
sephus, 88; may have been re- 
ferred to under a different name, 
89. 

Tholuck, his article on Paul’s 
speeches in the Acts compared 
with his Epistles, 286; his mode 
of reconciling Luke’s account of 
the Egyptian impostor with that 
of Josephus, 306. 

Timothy, was a native of Lystra, 
216; why required to be circum- 
cised, 217; whether he rejoined 


INDEX. 


Paul at Athens, 235; why he 
was sent from Ephesus into Mace- 
donia, 270 ; could not have writ- 
ten any part of the Acts, 281. 

Traditions among the Jews sanc- 
tioned as true: —in regard to 
Abraham’s first call, 101; in re- 
gard to the tomb of the patriarchs, 

_ 106; in regard to the age of Moses, 
109; the giving of the law by the 
agency of angels, 116 ; the length 
of Saul’s reign, 182. 

Tres Taberne, 388. 

Troas correctly distinguished from 
Mysia, 219. 

Trogyllium may be the na fa 
town or an island, 284. : 

Tyre, the emporium of Phenicia, 
295; the gospel preached there 
at an early period, 296. 


U. 


Unity of the human race, asserted 
by Paul, 248. 
Ur of the Chaldees, 100. 


ws 


Vengeance, not imprecated on Simon 
by the apostles, 123. 

Viper, why extinct in Malta, 382; 
its habits, 383. 

Vizier, Joseph’s office in Egypt, 
104. ‘ 

Vémel, his translation of the twenty- 
seventh chapter, 357. 

Vow, whether that mentioned in 18, 
18 was,Paul’s or Aquila’s, 260 ; 
how long that of a Nazarite,con- 
tinued, 301. 


THE 





407 


Voyages, how rapidly made in an- 
cient times, 387. 


We: 


Way, Appian, 388. 

Wieseler, his view of the duration of 
Pentecost, 303 ; his mode of reck- 
oning the twelve days mentioned 
in 24, 11 different from that of 
others, 327 sq. 

Windows, how made in Eastern 
houses, 282. : 

Winds, which prevail in the Medi- 
terranean near the end of sum- 
mer, 350; which blow off the 
land on the coast of Cilicia, 352 ; 
change suddenly from the south 
to the north, 361; those from the 
east apt to be lasting, 365; at 
what rate they would drive a ship 
situated like that of Paul on the 
voyage to Rome, 371. 

Winer, limits assigned by him to 
Proconsular Asia, 41; his opinion 
of the night-journey from Jerusa- 
lem to Antipatris, 324. 

Worship, nature of Sabaism, 113; 
that of the temple emblematical, 
114; performed at the river-side 
by the Jews, 220. 


Z. 


Zabians held that John was the Mes- 
siah, 265. 

Zealots unknown as a sect till after 
the time of Christ, 29; designated 
those in the church who con- 
tended for Jewish rites, 300. 


END. 

















THIS BOOK IS DUE ON THE LAST DATE 
STAMPED BELOW 


AN INITIAL FINE OF 25 CENTS 


WILL BE ASSESSED FOR FAILURE TO RETURN 
THIS BOOK ON THE DATE DUE. THE PENALTY 
WILL INCREASE TO 50 CENTS ON THE FOURTH 
DAY AND TO $1.00 ON THE SEVENTH DAY 
OVERDUE. 

































































LD 21-—100m-12,’43 (8796s) 











FEPECDDES TURE ON EAS A pags ngs i 


beet becds 








oe. ee oe ee ee 9 pom, Or ea eh cs 
SESS Ty ea at ae pr re ee ene 
Set Sie, AS SS SS et ee A oN Tn 

aa aa a Ag eS ee Sern pata ee a ee Te 0 per Nins aa sy 
Reade oe aera Sea eae a eA ae 2 : 


Cir: 


of 


oe en, 














o 


- / Ae A we Aenea nt - eee a ee es 
TT 























r= ee ces oon = : r e. 7 Y ai 
ene eee Som a gee CPOE SY ay NS rn ple we Ree ane tne een alee 

















ager 















































A = FSS SI ee 




































































rh r{t 
kik 
Fedris 





















































































































































































































































TTT TT Ore enPMaRAATTTTINTT TI | ed 





























































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































>. 
$k ces 
Sa eee pete Pa 
ob) Sate, wioeann, uae, aay 
24 Cots ow Sree ey 
Dh carmen a ge ew a ee 
So: Scape, sae ; = 
eee ee —* I 7 
Hacer oer, ac ae em 
ome seat soe ee = 
= Soe ee cee ee - = 
we igang, soon! Se ~ sn 
re | eee —t * Vomaed 
is mn Ie 
i ae : re 
= toe Se a 
a moccaw <aoeny ro 
nm — ae 
fe See ay Sa = 
x ate hoon = 
+ os oe = 
a 3 - 
Fen ps = 
x en cee = 
at Soman Pees = 
predacoren a ran = 
ia pemeay oe — = 
yeas pemienrteheeeeenenee oa 
Sa een: een Sees = 
Sfeamenn “seman: | pepe am 
Peyaoerasy my 5 ied 
od; ome | See rn 
See ee = 
ca deeanay 5 aoe a 
ee See 
ey i emet 
3 Ss oe 
iw, eoaee, eae 
© oe oe : < 
ee, me 
enone oo — 
Sy naeeemes” Reames sac ———— teres 
oat mae | Semen eager pene = Patol 
fears ,y aeaes, See 
See eee See — . 
RRR a eee ; Fame = hee a 
——= ee = = pape 
ee oe —— aiiesooeare ae oe 
es er =— Se reer ae ee, 
SaaS OS ———— a ns par ran Se = ee pee Sa 
Sa EE —=—=>=—=£=—=>E>> X= 8 eS Ee 
DSS EEE Se nes — soe ee Seren Se 
XS Doceen; aaans Se erereee seam ee aes bees Eo 
SS SES E—E=ElE=>oEEEEEEE <n Se a 
hb —— ae So ee ee ene 5 eas age ae a at pe ee ST proereas i 
ae eee : = = 4 — 36 ee E 
oa eoreig See ——w : he = = 7 mem Nas)" Speen Sao ore nee (ES SESS 
Ae a te eee eee : ; F . Me. SS ons a eS 
SS —=——SES™”_——————————— : é a . = ; =e) Weabeomener ; : watenen- sarees ee oe 
eee Sarees Seen aee eaten pat = etter Sanne Pom 
ISS SS EE ES SS a Soa a tas SS 
2 Saewk aemene  < heantene ae oa ae aa See ee SE 
SS Ss O—E—E—E=EESaeee SS fee ee | Caeriemnn eee oe et ee re = 
eS SS aE —— oS. seine eer Se tes Ste TS 
SS. SSS—™el—=—=E=—>E=——— EEE rea mea cpa ten aerate eS a SEE 
> SSE —————— ‘exe. "pom “ee osenepeelp enone ee St SE 
: re en ene en ‘guess. Saou go Senet pewerne mew ma same aera ee a ee een ee ec’ ey 
© “Sioa see amr nee ee hv ne Sree Serra mreeiipmeredies 
a oa wee Soe oes mae! woes See 
. ae ome Doo = ’ SSS Saosise v= aS So St 
‘Sig. picks’ ema | eek ecco — ea Soe ~ a ar oe eee = Se 
‘ ey eos ms — ef J we ane ae rt er ened, paene ST rs 
cS SS — SE Se Sins SS Se ss pores S: 
.  aediatei  e wr | S — ep * pe huuieiedenie eee i, ~— oreo 8, 
73ST ES —>—E—— EE t : [wee aoe) somceamee ne eee Soe ne ama prele SA 
: i eee eS SS = : Ate Sie, Geos oe 
. ee Se Sel ee ~ SS. SS re Se Serns!, Soant semen f 
; — SSE . SS e—e— ESS ieee Iga, pom 
Mg Sedpmagih” ener peorbahiinaheypesis iogienramemaey phere ee nee eine ener hm, toon 0 ns bt re hw Oe Nr me wwe eR ont wee nt ee a ee rn ae pn pyre fsa Biba pon aoe 
2S =) eee SESS ae ao. a = : Se eee estan e-eeraenpsseen spon pastes sores 
oS LS _OE—=ES EEE re ifs SSS eee trina omental 
sp Se ee : SS) SSS ee eee ate eee 
bs, a koe SS <<. Soe a ESSE Pome, 
Gees ie a ™ SS s22 STS SS ES SSS ba ETE 
a a oe. ees “ ‘S202 SS ee ee cae = ; . = 
Nae e ee - re — ae -~ Poarer ses 
S= ES _—=—E—EEE ae = : Soon 
So joceese Geaarn. seeceee ee ew ai Neweenere “geal = = ere : a 
ee amcente, toeeee (See =a ow wees Me sing Senne Pes - =o i 
=¢ wey omet aoe ya ames os ae : - we 
| Se ee Sees Se ee P= pong) ns he 
- ee ee ene, =~ me _ é nme ws nae marae awe woe % en = 
: ss) eee nae aoe rho ate me ee sine Bain ge ; = 
<eaans ee eS a SS aaa eee TE 7 
3 Soa: So vere amen yee a aheeemcinrvicaneryte soar = 
2a = a Siow eg ao = 
aw pee ; en rer 
<< mies meee 5 : s 
een ee = 
a mane oes : : - 
ay ames eer : ~ 
“nent Saas ‘ rey 
+ depos... lomo a) 
= Soe i 
Saat See 
= ~ 
—* erm pears mace cornence ees 4 
ama 
ee 









































2 marae a 
c sieeve hs patton 






































‘ reat eae 
Ch 
































iheaeaat 






































Teen 


} 
i 
i 





t 
{ 





seseLaahiesasheay 
RSE 





Ht 





suyugnie ii 











hal H 
ae } 
ate 


Hy 


































































































By he, i) ss mans 
aad ween Pee = 
a> Sono mamma eee 
moe SoS See 
ad > aes 




















we 
~ony 
+9 























hon LARS bos whan 

















